Vendor lawyer Hall helps county official buy house
June 2, 2008 9:38 pm
By DANIEL BLACKBURN and KAREN VELIE
A top county official’s Arroyo Grande home was jointly purchased by her and the family trusts of local lawyer Clay Hall, whose firm receives hundreds of thousands of dollars annually as the vendor responsible for the majority of San Luis Obispo County’s outside legal work.
Gail Wilcox, assistant county administrator, owns one-half undivided interest in the house on Blackberry Avenue, according to county property documents. She took a $417,000 mortgage in April 2007 to purchase her fifty percent share of the residence. Clay Hall, his wife Kristy A. Hall, and several of their family trusts own the other half. The total purchase price, according to records, was $580,000.
Wilcox acknowledged the arrangement Monday.
“This is outside of work,” she said, adding that she perceives no conflict of interest. She said she has no direct authority over payments made by the county to Hall’s law firm, Hall, Hieatt & Connely of San Luis Obispo.
Hall also denied a conflict, describing the Wilcox property deal as “making financial sense for my family.”
Hall’s firm has provided no-bid legal work for the county for more than two decades. The county presently has about 32 legal cases placed with outside, private law firms; Hall is handling three-fourths of those, said County Counsel spokesperson Warren Jenson.
A month before the Blackberry Avenue deed was granted, Wilcox’s boss, County Administrator David Edge, put a proposal before supervisors purporting to “review and update” the county’s conflict of interest codes. The resolution, placed on the supervisors’ consent calendar and approved without dissent on March 20, 2007, also contains language specifically exempting Wilcox’s residence from the conflict regulations. The exemption appears to circumvent California law governing public officials’ conduct and defining conflicts of interest.
San Luis Obispo County officials have adopted a conflict of interest code patterned after the state Government Code. Both require financial disclosures by elected and appointed county officials and specific employees. The state code prohibits any county employee from benefitting from any contract approved by his or her department.
County Administrator David Edge said Monday that he doesn’t see a conflict of interest in the Wilcox-Hall arrangement.
“I think it is not a problem. She [Wilcox] is not involved… Deb [Hossli, county human resources director] is in charge and she reports to me,” said Edge.
Hossli, who promised to provide financial and contract information for reporters early Monday regarding county payments to Hall’s law firm, was instead “in meetings” and unavailable by publication time.
Wilcox, who takes down more than $200,000 a year in salary and benefits, said Monday she is no longer the county’s chief budget officer. Other county officials, however, told UncoveredSLO.com Monday that they currently believe she still is.
Edge suggested “it was probably County Counsel” that made the initial proposal for the conflict of interest resolution changes.
Wilcox received the grant deed to her new house on May 23, 2007. On that document, she is listed as “a married woman.” She was separated from David Wilcox around the time of purchase of her Blackberry Avenue house. The neatly-groomed, single-story, 1,600-square-foot residence has three bedrooms and two baths and is located in an area of homes with a value range of $550,000 to $750,000.
Wilcox’s required statement of economic interests, filed late with the county in April, lists no reportable assets for calendar year 2007. She received a stern letter threatening sanctions from county clerk-recorder Julie Rodewald for missing the filing deadline.
SLO County employees started work on revisions for the conflict of interest code in February 2007. The result was a “resolution updating the conflict of interest code for the county administrative office to reflect two title changes due to classification changes.” In Edge’s subsequent discussion with supervisors, he said the “administrative office has made changes to their conflict of interest code. The board of supervisors is responsible for approving conflict of interest codes for county departments… and therefore [it is] necessary to approve department’s designated position list.”
According to Edge, the conflict code revision also was necessary to accommodate a change in Wilcox’s title, from “Deputy County Administrator” to “Assistant County Administrator.” Along with that change was a less conspicuous alteration; newly adopted requirements for Wilcox’s conflict reporting now specifically exclude this particular provision:
“Investments in, and income from, any business entity doing business with the County and engaged in (a) the acquisition, sale or lease or development of real property; (b) provision of insurance brokerage or consulting services; or (c) provision of consulting services of the type which have, in the past two years, or which with reasonable foreseeability, may be utilized in the next one-year period by the filer’s particular division within the Department.”
When asked if the new resolution’s wording might refer specifically to her own residence, Wilcox said, “I’m not aware of that.”
Wilcox said, “I don’t think this is a conflict of interest because I don’t have any authority over Clay. I don’t deal directly with Clay Hall contracts. Deb Hossli deals with them, she signs off on Clay’s bills. I’m not involved in securing his services. That goes through Deb (Hossli) and David (Edge).”
Wilcox was asked if she thought her financial arrangement with Hall posed a potential conflict of interest.
“Nope,” she said. “I even checked it out with my boss before I did the deal. He said there was no conflict.”
She said she couldn’t recall if that particular exchange was verbal or written.
When asked if he perceived a conflict of interest, Hall replied that the house on Blackberry Avenue “is my wife’s investment. She wanted to get into the real estate investment market. The house was purchased jointly. She has half.” Hall then added, “And [Wilcox] pays rent. But she has half, too.” Hall offered no explanation regarding the rental agreement.
Edge said the Hall firm was picked by the county in “a decision of risk management years ago.” Edge said he did not know if “a specific contract” with Clay exists. County officials have been unable to locate such a contract. A Ventura County claims administrator, Carl Warren and Co., receives county disbursements to pay Hall’s firm. That contract also was unavailable.
Jenson said Hall’s law firm “has been doing the bulk of the [county’s outside] work, and they’re good at it.”
Jenson added, “I don’t think competitive bidding works well in professional services.” And he said Hall’s firm “is the only experienced law firm specializing in this type of work.”
Asked why his firm gets so much work from the county, Hall said, “We’ve been doing cases on and off since the early 1980s. We are the only pure defense firm in the county. The others do plaintiff work; you get conflicts when you do both.”
Tags:, conflict, county officials, San Luis Obispo County
Member Opinions:
By: Anonymous on 6/18/08
I'm writing in response to "yahoo's" and "anothercomment's" entry regarding alleged special treatment of a new hire (dated 06-08-08). After reading your entries, I was quickly reminded of a saying "it is better to be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt." An entrusted truth seeker has apparently misinformed you. Check your facts. There is no blood relation between the former “GS Director” and the female you reference as ‘his daughter’. This same female was not married at the time the ‘new worker’ was hired. Therefore, your comment about ‘his daughter’ and ‘his son-in-law’ hold no merit. If you work in the department, as you claim, then you would know the truth of the situation; the night-shift position was temporary to cover a staff shortage. It was not approached as a permanent shift change, was not mutually agreed to as a permanent shift change, and thusly, wasn’t maintained as a permanent shift change.
“anothercomment” asked “Why are department directors allowed to hire their family?” Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with the County’s hiring procedures. A Director would not be responsible for hiring for a position unless it was a position that he/she would directly supervise. If you truly are working “in general services” (which as a title of a department should be capitalized i.e. General Services) then you could rely on your own memory regarding the day you interviewed for your position. Perhaps you were interviewed by one or two people, or in front of a panel. Regardless, it was not in front of the Director.
I suggest you quit sniveling and wipe your nose. Be a big boy. By the way, it’s been reported that somebody has been taking excessive breaks lately and are often unaccounted for at the job site. Go look in the mirror, and see if you approve of the work ethics of the person staring back at you, and then remember, THAT’s the only person you need to worry about, THAT’s the only person you are responsible for, and THAT’s the only person you have a right to judge.
By: Anonymous on 6/14/08
I think Edge said on the radio the posts were from him. Maybe that was an Edge impersonator on the Congalton's show. Scary.
By: Anonymous on 6/14/08
re: "been there"'s last entry. it amazes me that people actually think david edge himself wrote those responses below. you can be anybody you want on here…hence the name carol brady. certainly you don't believe 'curious george' the cartoon monkey actually wrote the response below as well do you? c'mon now. and for you clock watchers… everyone gets a lunch break by law and not everyone takes that break from 12-1pm. salaried positions don't have hours set in cement. sometimes their projects take them beyond the 5:00 hour. should they be paid overtime in addition to their salaries? or take their time back at no added expense to the budget? occasionally people have been known to take a vacation day off. sometimes people are even too sick to come to work and have to stay home. but i guess you took that into consideration when you decided, solely based on date and time, it was impossible for any other scenario to be considered and the 'david edge' blogger was using County time. call the waaa-ambulance.
By: Anonymous on 6/11/08
I find it interesting that David Edge responded on 6-4-08 @ 1:24pm. So now we pay him to respond to e-mails. No wonder we are over budget. It also seems that he is a little too personally involved and is protesting a little too much. But having been there, they both cover each others butts. They have been doing this for years. Maybe someone will take this to a higher level and get some action. Does anyone have any ideas???????? I am tired of all the corruption in SLO Administration.
By: Anonymous on 6/10/08
to concerned_taxpayer
Boy you sure read a lot into that. The link is gone. Thats all I said. Why was what I wanted to no. My comment was tongue in cheek about Dave, Dan, and Karen. A bit defensive are't you?
By: Anonymous on 6/9/08
Hey Dori, how are yuh? Still doing your imitation of chinese people? I remember a time when you hated Gail and Deb; let's see weren't you one that testified about certain job specs being fixed for her to get the Assistant DSS Director position. Oh yeah, and I heard another position got fixed for Deb. But you probably don't give a hoot about that now that you're drinkin' buddies and take county paid trips here and there with her? What happened to all your personal conviction?
Couldn't help commenting to you Dave Hurst . . . what do you know about how she's doing as HR director? Cussin' and swearin's all I hear. And how much are those billings that she receives from Mr. Hall?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/9/08
Insider, great post about the link to 920kvec … because it is a GREAT example of making something out of nothing as MANY posters have done here with FALSE or BAD info about County and other staff-you are, as many posters here, seem to be just trying to stir something up without having ANY facts-just spoutin' off. In this case, as you posted your blog note at 5something today about the link to 920kvec guess where Karen was? YES … AT KVEC! Doing David C's show. Readers – my fellow humans/people, this is a GREAT example of how people such as alledged "Insider" and MANY others post comments here without knowing the facts. DO NOT believe all you read; in fact, I thing SLO County is run as well as any governmetn entity can be, although it does have its issue. But, this blog-MANY of the posts here are pure BS from people with a personal grip or simply looking for attention or "payback", without knowing the facts, at all. You CANNOT take many of these posts at face value, at all. Think for yourselves, don't just believe a bunch of BS from bloggers with a vengenance. So, thanks "Insider" for making my point with your post…funny you'd post that when Dave C and Karen were together! It NEGATES all of your your other supposed "insider" info credibility. Just gossip, zero facts.
By: Anonymous on 6/9/08
Did anybody notice the link to 920kvec is gone. Is there trouble between Dave, Dan and Karen. Now theres a story.
By: Anonymous on 6/9/08
Apparently Edge and Wilcox are hoping this thing just fades away. There seems to be no attempt to address the real issue hear. Maybe Dan and Karen should contact the Political Fair Action Commitee themselves since the county obviously does not intend too. Whose protecting the public when it appears there is corruption at the highest levels of county government. Obviously not David Edge or the Board of Supervisors.
By: Anonymous on 6/8/08
No rules were broken when he hired his daughter's husband. But the others are right that it is a morale issue because he got special treatment.
By: Anonymous on 6/8/08
There are indeed systemic morale problems from top to bottom. They did a couple of surveys, but anybody who knows that IT can indeed trace the person answering the survey is not going to answer, or if they do, they won't give candid answers.
By: Anonymous on 6/8/08
I agree with insider that it sounds like there are internal moral problems that the BOS needs to address. We are all taxpayers and should demand that government be run effectively, efficiently and legally. Citizens should call their Board member and ask what is going on in County Government.
By: Anonymous on 6/8/08
Is this not suppose to be about the original report of proper or improper action of a county administrator.
Though interesting, it sounds like there is county wide morale issues under the current administration which should be dealt with by our B.O.S.
By: Anonymous on 6/8/08
I worknin general services. I think the things END IS NEAR said are mean and wrong. The new gs director aleady has met with us twice which is twice more then the past gs director. We were told we can only go through our supervisor before. The past gs director hired his soninlaw who cried to daddy warbucks when he got night shift and guess what? Just like that the new guy gets on day shifts. Why are department directors allowed to hire their family?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/8/08
Sounds like this has become a format for a lot of disgruntled county employees to vent about the current disfunctional county government. As a non county employee, a voting county citizen,and an individual that views almost every supervisors, and planning commission meeting I suggest our bloated county goverment is starting to show the strain of too many rats on the ship. They are all looking over thier shoulders as to who will go first. The county government like all government has grown far beyond its need and purpose. They know there is only one way to bring expenses in line with income and that is to eliminate some of the rats. The smarter ones will start looking for greener pastures while the rest will just gnaw on each other for a while.
By: Anonymous on 6/8/08
Way to go dave hurst. Bet none of these spineless morons have the guts to use their own names. But c'mon you freedom to bloggers, take his challenge. Any ONE of you have the guts to use your real name? Man up and drop the cloaks children. You won't think this FORUM is so great when it's your turn to be smeared. Only a matter of time.
I would particularly like to hear from mr or mrs GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT.
By: Anonymous on 6/8/08
To Curious George, Yes.
By: Anonymous on 6/7/08
Are you the same David Hurst who was forced to resign from the DA's office back in the 90s for improper conduct? Just curious.
By: Anonymous on 6/7/08
yes. I sent it 3 times just to get some sort of response.
By: Anonymous on 6/7/08
Unlike most of you who have blogged here I am not afraid to use my name. I'm Dave Hurst, who "forced out" says "I live with Ms Hossli". Get up to speed "Forced Out", she moved out in October of last year. Yes I am on a conflict public defender contract but I am not the administrator for the contract or involved in the negotiations for it. That is Mr. Schiavo. Oh yes, I have been on the contract far before Ms. Hossli ever became the HR director. However, everyone seems compelled to vilify Ms. Hossli. I have absolutely nothing to gain from defending her. She's not exactly fond of me. Do your homework. Has she been an effective HR director? Has she saved money for the county while being the head of Risk Management? The answer is yes to both. Leave her alone and let her do her job. If you don't have the heuvos to use your name in these blogs here is my email. aviladave@aol.com. Of course you will have to enter an address of your own so you probably won't respond.
By: Anonymous on 6/7/08
Unlike most of you who have blogged here I am not afraid to use my name. I'm Dave Hurst, who "forced out" says "I live with Ms Hossli". Get up to speed "Forced Out", she moved out in October of last year. Yes I am on a conflict public defender contract but I am not the administrator for the contract or involved in the negotiations for it. That is Mr. Schiavo. Oh yes, I have been on the contract far before Ms. Hossli ever became the HR director. However, everyone seems compelled to vilify Ms. Hossli. I have absolutely nothing to gain from defending her. She's not exactly fond of me. Do your homework. Has she been an effective HR director? Has she saved money for the county while being the head of Risk Management? The answer is yes to both. Leave her alone and let her do her job. If you don't have the heuvos to use your name in these blogs here is my email. aviladave@aol.com. Of course you will have to enter an address of your own so you probably won't respond.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/7/08
Unlike most of you who have blogged here I am not afraid to use my name. I'm Dave Hurst, who "forced out" says "I live with Ms Hossli". Get up to speed "Forced Out", she moved out in October of last year. Yes I am on a conflict public defender contract but I am not the administrator for the contract or involved in the negotiations for it. That is Mr. Schiavo. Oh yes, I have been on the contract far before Ms. Hossli ever became the HR director. However, everyone seems compelled to vilify Ms. Hossli. I have absolutely nothing to gain from defending her. She's not exactly fond of me. Do your homework. Has she been an effective HR director? Has she saved money for the county while being the head of Risk Management? The answer is yes to both. Leave her alone and let her do her job. If you don't have the heuvos to use your name in these blogs here is my email. aviladave@aol.com. Of course you will have to enter an address of your own so you probably won't respond.
By: Anonymous on 6/7/08
End is near
Your chops are busted because that IT nerd cranked a quarter million of fat out two hours after she moved in. OUCH. But more money for the rest of us I say. If the new guy can spell and show up to work on time he'll be an improvement. Time for you and your ilk to move on before you give more people compensable damages.
By: Anonymous on 6/7/08
Gail only has Gail in her best interest. There has been no savings in re-orgs or any other decision by Gail, only items that promote her salary and that of unqualified appointments like the most recent G.S. director position, the newest puppet. The public should feel comfortable knowing that now millions of dollars in county projects will be managed by an ex-Sears salesman and an I.T nerd over him. Your tax dollars at work. WOW when will it end.
By: Anonymous on 6/7/08
I would like to thaqnk UncSLO for this forum. Where else can we have had such an open and frank exchange? If you read this thread, you really get a better sense of how our county government operates, both good and bad.
I think this has been quite healthy and perhaps Wilcox, Edge, Hosli, Hall and company will be a little more careful in their actions now knowing that there is some kind of local media watching them. THIS IS A GOOD THING!
But I gleaned this from a previouos post: "Vendor Hall sat on the selection committee when Hossli competed for the HR job."
WHAT? Hossli and Wilcox have been incredibly tight friends for years. Hall helps Hossli get a plumb job. Hossli looks the other way when Hall helps Wilcox buy a house.
And you suggest there isn't a story here? I fear the worst is yet to come.
By: Anonymous on 6/7/08
Gee, Dori clam down……
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/7/08
ForcedOut, you could get an assignment with Uncovered! Much of your info is as in error as some of their initial story so you’d be a good fit. One basic thing you are in factual error with is Hossli and Hurst, even though that is personal business, but since you noted it, they do not live together. They do not even live in the same city. And you cannot even get the name of the sheriff’s department title correct, such a simple thing. Yes that is a very minor tiny itty bitty little issue getting the official name of the department wrong which many, many people do but if you are going to be professing to be posting factual info here and you are slamming other people personally you can’t slip up with very tiny basics like that. In this context, at least two basic, simple wrongs like that mean you have zero credibility with me. Plus, referencing the Sheriff’s Dept by the wrong, very old title of office means you have been LONG gone, long ago “forced out” and thus have no knowledge of current operations-or you otherwise don’t pay attention to detail and indeed the devil is in the details. As for Wilcox, she is a good person and, although I do not want to go into this here because it is no one’s business, it is her personal business and it is unfair to discuss this in public forums but based on other comments here I will, she is a caring and loving mother. And, as others have posted here she does have the best interests of the county and taxpayers in mind. She is smart, straightforward, does not beat around the bush and is otherwise very capable at her job. She calls people on it when they try to BS something. SOME people can’t handle that. Heaven forbid they are called to task for what they do, or do not do, and then have to face the music and then in turn have anonymous internet blogs to bitch about how allegedly unfairly they were treated. Get real and get a mirror because as a taxpayer I WANT people like Wilcox running this county and asking straightforward questions and having the backbone to take action when needed regardless of how popular or unpopular that appropriate action from her or Edge or whomever might be. Wilcox should be commended, not slammed. And, with the voter turn-out rate from last Tuesday I’ll surmise a fair number of the posters here did not even cast a vote. They’d rather whine and/or do the “poor me” routine than participate in a democracy versus petty bashing on the internet. Not only that but how many posters here go to events such as board of supervisors meetings to really see what happens and how the county really works or at least watch it on cable or the internet or listen on the radio. Not many, I bet. Not pretty. As for Hossli and comments from former county employees perhaps there is a reason they are FORMER county employees. Remember, county employees are here to serve the overall good of the citizens – if some cannot serve the common good instead of being concerned with their own personal interests or agendas perhaps they should indeed end up as former county employees. As for Hossli she is no idiot. To post statements regarding humorous normal human-being mockingly fun stuff that may or may not be in her office is stretching it a lot … if that is the best one can do it is zero wonder why they are FORMER county employees. I KNOW Wilcox and Hossli run tight ships – as taxpayers we should all expect them to do so – I do expect that – and if employees cannot accept that and the resulting benefit to TAXPAYERS then they should indeed be former employees-how appropriate for both the county and the citizens who are we taxpayers. Continue to watch out for OUR taxpayer interests, Wilcox, Hossli, and others instead of these individuals pinging on you because of their own self interest and not the taxpayers.
By: Anonymous on 6/7/08
Some consultants working for government are required to file conflict of interest forms. They also need to list financial investments.
By: Anonymous on 6/6/08
Yes I agree with the writer below. The sups hire a "human resources" director with major potty mouth. As a former employee whose been in her office, heard her cuss in front of anyone, etc. And what county official would have a sign in her office referring to herself as a "b__ch"? Yeah thats right. . . . And this is the person in charge of administering county personnel policies!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/6/08
There are two parts to conflict of interest for public officials.
They are: 1. participating in decisions that will have either a negative or positive financial benefit on the official, and 2. disclosing economic interest, which is required on the annual Statement of Economic Interests (e.g., Form 700).
There are minimum requirements regarding conflict of interest under the State Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC), pursuant to the Political Reform Act.
One example of reporting on the Statement of Economic Interests is if a public official has an investment (e.g., financial interest) with business entity located in, doing business in, planning to do business in, or which has done business during the previous 2 years the agency's jurisdiction.
For anyone wanting more information on FPPC Regulations, go to:
http://www.fppc.ca.gov/library/seibook9-04.pdf
http://www.fppc.ca.gov/Act/Act08.pdf
http://www.fppc.ca.gov/index.html?id=52
By: Anonymous on 6/6/08
guilty until proved otherwise? what country ar you from?
By: Anonymous on 6/6/08
hossli ousted a load of deadwood and won't be surprised by this dribble. DPL, TK AND RG, move on.
By: Anonymous on 6/6/08
ForcedOut writes: Dan and Karen please take a close look at the relationship of vendor Hall and the Wilcox/Hossli dynamic duo! Wilcox runs the County – not Edge. He is too busy sexually harrassing his female mid level managers and having affairs with other County employees. Vendor Hall sat on the selection committee when Hossli competed for the HR job. She had no qualifications, cusses like a sailor and drinks like a fish. Yet, with the help of vendor Hall and a Board of Sups, that act like blind sheep in a dark room, she gets the job over dozens of more qualified and experienced applicants. Within weeks she proposes pay raises for the Board of Sups and approves rate increases for vendor Hall! All of this with Wilcox's blessing. Due to Hossli's lack of experience she has cost the county millions of tax payer dollars in her mishandling of the sheriff's office mess. $600 an hour for a retired judge to do an inquiry that was already being done by the state department of justice? Also ask the question about the last time vendor Hall ever represented the County in a court trial? Answer is never…County always pays always settles. Nice collusion with the plaintiff attorney's – vendor Hall runs up his bill, settles the case and everyone gets paid. Very convenient and very corrupt. Money and power are corrupting influences. Where are the disclosures? The public is taken advantage of because no one is paying attention.
Hossli lives with David Hurst – a local attorney with a county public defender contract. How convenient!
By: Anonymous on 6/6/08
An Accountant says:
Sorry pal, but you are missing the point! Lets assume everything is kosher as far as the numbers are concerned. Of course you can have a partnership with any one you please.
Lets see the other aspect of this story. Employed by the county at taxpayers expense and very well paid with all benefits and good pension, most taxpayers can only dream of. The outside attorney with a contract of a million dollar and you know most of it is time since there is not much material involved. Spend time togather in their free time off hours. Of course we all assume they don't talk business in their private conversation so they can also claim there was no conflict of interest. Now lets make a case for my naivite but don't take me or anyone else for stupid, please!!
If a men of cloth goes to the Bunny Ranch in Nevada, claiming to make an assesment of how they operate so he can warn his flock against the dangers of such a place, will you take his word?
Most people would not, even if he had done nothing wrong (prostitution is legal in some counties) or illigal.
And that is the smell test!!
I hope you get it!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/6/08
It really doesn't take much to determine the relationship of Wilcox and Hall as to whether it is an investment property to Wilcox or her personal residence. Simply get a copy of the HUD agreement and escrow final closing statement which were provided at the close of the property by the escrow co. And a copy of Hall's and Wilcox's 2007 Federal income taxes with all attachments which will show on schedules A and E how they characterized the property for tax purposes. Period end of question. It may be harder than getting a look at Bill Clinton's contributors for the library I imagine.
By: Anonymous on 6/6/08
to an Accountant
The question is can one single family residence be in joint ownership with one person claiming thier half as a personal residence for tax purposes and the other joint resident claiming thier half as a rental property on thier taxes. If so I've never seen it and the only way to prove that type of thing was acually taking place would be to see the tax filings of both parties . Right Mr. Accountant?
By: Anonymous on 6/6/08
"Wants Proof" finally gives us the attack dogs basic point –
"they are guilty until they can prove otherwise".
And so our constitution is trumped by the mob mentality of the anonymous internet.
By: Anonymous on 6/6/08
What kind of idiots are up in the middle of the night writing on a blog? Partiularly on a blog owned by scumbags that got fired for being incompetent from a anti government weekly rag?
By: Anonymous on 6/6/08
One can have a property that they don't own as their principal residence. And of course they can own half of their personal residence. Also this does not appear to be a partnership. It appears to be a joint ownership. To be a partnership it would be held in the name of the partnership and not individuals.
By: Anonymous on 6/6/08
One can have a property that they don't own as their principal residence. And of course they can own half of thir personal residence. Also this does not appear to be a partnership. It appears to be a joint ownership. To be a partnership it would be held in the name of the partnership and not individuals.
By: Anonymous on 6/6/08
To Anonymous,
You say you want to see proof that this is illegal. Funny that the rest of us want to see proof that it trully is legal. We can't get those answers. There are a bunch of flapping jaws here (or in this case snapping fingers) but not one single question regarding the financial arrangements of this little deal have been answered. That says a lot. If I were in Gail and Halls situation I would be waving my proof of 50/50 payments, rent payments, interest deductions in everyones face. So I say they are guilty until they can prove otherwise. Anyone who doesn't know that this is a conflict of interest no matter how you slice it should not be working in a government position.
By: Anonymous on 6/6/08
One can have a property that they don't own as their principal residence. And of course they can own half of thir personal residence
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/6/08
I agree, this should not be a personal issue. But when people are calling out personal facts about Mr. Hall's and Ms. Wilcox's family affairs, it becomes that.
If indeed it is a "criminal" issue, then why did they not attempt to hide it? One would think that two people with the status such as those in question would think about that IF there was some kind of illegal or reprehensible matter taking place.
All I know is, I want proof. I want sources. I want to see, literally see with my own eyes, proof of the illegality of this process.
And in response to "To Jason," who apparently knows the persons in question, I say to each his or her own. Any person could write a comment on here and claim to know them. Hell, maybe I do. Maybe I think they are both completely just and ethical people. Every person has their own opinion, and therefore judging a person by someone else's critiques is not the way to go. Didn't we learn that in preschool.
Honestly folks.
By: Anonymous on 6/6/08
How is this a 'personal issue"? Are you insane? Ms. Wilcox has no personal privacy when she chooses to do a business transaction with Mr. Hall.
What is it about ethics that you don't understand? This is just the tip of the county iceberg and more will flow in the weeks to come.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
I don't agree. Everyone has some family. It does not bar them from problems. This is not a personal issue. It is a criminal issue
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
Before any judging occurs..it is important to remember that what is said not only affects the people talked about, but their families and friends as well. Consideration is important when it comes to issues where not all the information is known. If uncovering is the main goal of this site, it is important to uncover issues that are clearly affecting the residents of this area. Personal buisness is called that for a reason. it is personal, and with all the facts, it is easy to see that this is not really what is being made out to be.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
182 comments have been posted on this story so far. 182.
So tell me this isn't a news story.
Shame on the Fibune for not pursuing this.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
I agree with your points about Gail and Clay Hall and the inferences to some type of sexual relationship. That's just dirty and petty B.S. and clearly wrong to malign people. However, as a county employee who does know Mr. Edge, etc. — don't assume this is all on the up and up; an investment? No she claims its a residence. If it's an investment, did Mr. Hall file an economic statement with the FPPC? because consultants with our department are required to. Mr. Blackburn does not owe Wilcox or Edge a public apology. And for those "few" of you who have indicated that Edge and Gail have integrity, you must be kidding! And for the writer who inferred that a former department head used offensive, gender based remarks about "blondie", it's well known around the County Government how offensive Mr. Edge can be. . . he is well known for making the most inappropriate and offensive comments of all. Gail is rude and arrogant . . . and now we know she also lacks good judgment.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
The absence of a direct and present quid-pro-quo conflict of interest does not make deals like this squeaky clean. And for many other kinds of office holders, things like this are prohibited for good reason.
I'd prefer county administrators who know that incestuous business deals with major county contractors involving hundreds of thousands of dollars are a bad idea. It's not the scandal of the century, but people of high integrity have a keener sense of smell.
The only consolation is that the Hall's investment was probably timed about as poorly as possible in a crashing property market.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
I heard about this story on the radio yesterday and then decided to look into it a little more on this site. Intrigued by both sides' arguments in the blogs, I find it interesting that the accusers are leaving out a few important details. A few things I'd like to make a point of:
1) What are you, the accusers, trying to prove? Why make a big deal about something like this when there are larger issues at hand? Can't you pull your panties out of your rear ends and understand that sometimes people make arrangements that are not trying to scam us "peons"? Not everything is a conspiracy, you know. Why, in all hell, would they leave in plain site a "scam" such as this if they need to hide something?
2) If all of you are so convinced that this actually is a scam, why are some of you signing as anonymous? What do YOU have to hide? Is it because when you might be proved wrong, you don't want to be associated with it? Or, are you friends of those involved and are deciding to be two-faced? I am deeply concerned with what kind of problems this blogging process is creating: random, misinformed people giving their two cents about a topic they don't fully understand and making incorrect claims and allegations anonymously with no repercussions. It should be noted that letters to the editor of newspapers are NEVER taken if they have an unsigned author.
3) Since when do we only listen to what others see and hear? Sure, we've all gotten the alleged facts from the alleged reporters…but where are they getting their numbers and other pieces of information? In today's society, we must all question the sources of gossip, no matter if we agree or disagree with them. We were taught that rule in 4th grade when we heard rumors about who "Billy" kissed underneath the slide. Does Mr. Hall really make millions every year, and does he really get 80% of the county's business? Please give us, the public, your sources; until then, how can we believe you are not misconstruing details to your advantage?
4) In the radio conversation, Mr. Edge said that Mr. Blackburn owes Ms. Wilcox an apology for his erroneous reporting. Even Mr. Blackburn accepted his mistakes; but when will he give a formal and public acknowledgement of his malfeasance?
5) Not only are you, the accusers, being ignorant and stupid, but you are also overstepping your boundaries by making false accusations as to the sexual activity between Mr. Hall and Ms. Wilcox. Who has actually seen them together? These are outright lies. And how is Mr. Hall's "leaving the office before 4 to be with his son at the baseball fields" wrong? Since when is it bad for a dad to be involved with his son's endeavors? You who made that claim: if he leaves early, have you considered the fact that he might arrive early or work on weekends?
This is a story; that point is correct. However, the story is that the inaccuracy of Mr. Blackburn's language is leading people to believe that this is a conflict of interest when in fact it was just a simple investment made by two parties. You may all reply to this, but really consider what you are saying. As for me, I have made my case and I will leave it at this.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
Maybe Edge has a conflict in interest in determining whether there is a conflict interest. Since it sounds like he orchestrated the way to avoid the conflict maybe just maybe he shouldn't be the one to judge. You think?
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
You are ignorant (as is Mr. Edge), everyone keeps talking conflict of interest code and statements. Guess what? There are other conflict "laws" in California as well as common law ones. Thank you to the reporters who broke this. Now be smart and start making the requests for the County's public records. The most amazing thing about this is that Edge and Wilcox appear ignorant as does "Anonymous" of the California and common law conflict provisions. How could people in their high offices lack such judgment?
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
To Atascadero Too. The FBI investigation is still being conducted in Atascadero. I have no doubt they will be taking a look at Wilcox, Hall and Edge. This is not a small thing. Edge would like to make it look that way but it isn't about "nothing". The FBI will get the documents that the county won't give up. I'll bet you all $$ to donuts that I'm right.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
When any Supervisor or Council person has even the possibility of conflict they always call the political fair action commitee why is this different unless you don't want to know. It's just a phone call.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
If that house was bought as an investment by the two of them it can not be defined as a principle residence by IRS code. It is a rental. The rent is income to the partners and all the costs are costs. You can't claim half a house as a principle residence. Ask an Accountant.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
"David Edge looks for the good in others"? Since his reign began, he has been ruthless in promoting himself and his own interests (and his own people, like DSS Lee Collins), and has repeatedly denigrated county employees. Gail has adopted the same us vs. them mentality. They sit in their upper floor tower and do exactly what they want to do, and nobody, including the BOS, challenges them. It's time for some real leadership, and time for them to be held accountable. Katcho, et al, get some balls and get rid of them.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
I'm with Liam – Dan's "big story" fell apart when it turned out he made a mistake in claiming the rules were changed for Wilcox. In fact, Dan now admits, no rules were changed. So what's left – Wilcox and Hall bought a house together. Is that reportable on Form 700? Not if its her residence. Is it a conflict of interest? No. Is it a POTENTIAL conflict of interest – sure.
The onus is on Wilcox and her boss to see that she is not involved in decisions relating to Hall's business with the county. Seems like they have set that in place in the office.
As Liam says – no laws broken – and Blackburn said the same thing on Congalton last night.
For those of you that want to keep going it sure does look personal.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
From Dewdog:
We are told that Wilcox and Hall are "partners" and both own the home equally. Then we are told that Wilcox rents the house from Hall. Now some questions, is Wicox a homeowner or a renter? Title to the property is Tenants in Common which means both parties can hold an equal or unequal share of ownership.
The amount of the mortgage is $417,000. At an interest rate of 6% the monthly PI payment would be $2500.13. Property taxes would be approximately $607.17 per month and insurance would be around $65 per month. This ads up to a monthly cost of around $3169.30 per month.
So, who made the down payment of $163,000? Was the down payment equal? What is the rental rate? Is the rental rate proportional to the amount of down payment each party made? Who takes the tax write off for ownership of the house? Since I assume that Mr. Hall owns another home he would be exempt from the homeowners deduction. If Ms. Wilcox is a renter, did she apply for a homeowners exemption.
These should be very easy questions to answer and varify what actual arrangement Wilcox and Hall have.
I have an open mind on this, but if there are no answers to these questions I will become more and more suspicious of this transaction.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
to Liam
If it's such a slam dunk and this is so oke doke with you government employees why not just run it by the fair action political commitee staff so us peons can feel OK about it? No one seems to want to answer that.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
If no law has been broken, does that end it for you? If not, then the problem becomes "personal."
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
Who said Dan made a mistake in his report? Edge? I heard the story stands. He said one word in a non-important sentence could have been changed, isn't relevent. Did Wilcox get to close and cross the line in dealings with Hall. Yes she did. Is there a confict of interest? Hell yes. There are reasons for laws on these things. To protect us from greedy and unethical government types.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
So, that's that.
UncoveredSLO got a hot tip from a disgruntled old enemy of Gail, and it turns out that she and some friends really did go in together on a house. Dan made a mistake in his report, thinking something nefarious had occurred, but it turns out it didn't. Maybe some "perception of conflict," but no illegality of any kind.
Everyone got to vent their spleen about government, and David Edge, and Gail, and Dan Blackburn, and Santa Maria Bill, and a few people got to trot out their distasteful fantasies, but that's that.
Sure, it's more fun than figuring out what to do about housing and pollution and gangs and growth and homelessness but, hey, I suppose it's time for us to get serious again.
Damn. It's so much more fun to rant and wring our hands about this trivial nonsense, isn't it? Growing up is a bitch.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
I knew Gail for 8 years and in my view she is as dedicated, committed and ethical a public servant as exists in SLO County. If she is seen by some as "too direct" on occasion, that's because she expects the same honesty from others as she demands of herself. While I might have advised her differently than apparently Edge did, her arrangement with the Halls is not illegal. But in public life perception rules, and she would have been better advised to find another investing partner not so close to County business. But any tawdry speculation by "journalists" about Gail's character is just downright malicious and irresponsible – and deserves any financial consequences coming its way.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
If Dan gave up his source, I never heard it. Also, you need not go any farther than the county building to find a source for this story, public docs. There is no controversy here if it happened or not, only if we should care. financial arrangements between county leaders and contractors is not OK. Gail did not claim her joint investment with Hall on her 700 form. Or is her residence. I quess it is determined by the question of the moment.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
To Departmenthead,
I'm not impressed with your ranting. Answer the questions and provide the documents and contracts that have been requested. Until I have answers your all guilty.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
Your statements are interesting, but we still do not have all of the answers. The money needs to be followed.No one seems to want to address the money issue. Maybe Mr. Edge caould provide us with that info and put this matter to rest.
With interest I noted how you praised Ms. Wilcox for all of the money she saved the county with the closure of the General Hospital and the deal she cut with a clinic. You then went on to say the money is now spent on other county programs. I may be a little slow but that didn't save me or the other taxpayers a penny.
Saving money is when you don't spend it all. Oh I forgot that in government that if someone actually does save money they had better spend it on something before the end of the fiscal year or they will not get as much or anymore.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
to department head
Quote from your blog
Mr. Blackburn referred the comments in this story as "fun and interesting". The story and statements allege Ms. Wilcox engaged in malfaesance, prostituted herself and abandoned her children. It is also alleged that the county director of public works engaged in illicit activities with Ms. Wilcox in exchange for his promotion.
Now I have read these blogs and listen to the radio show as well as the segment with David Edge. No where did I see Dan or Karen make the allegations you just outlined. Let me put it this way. If your a friend of Ms. Wilcox she don't need no enemies.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
Mr. Blackburn confirmed what others have said re: the source for this story. Mr. Blackburn might have clarified that this person recently retired. Just like Mr. Congalton I have no dog in this fight. I have experienced Mr. Blackburn and Ms. Velie's journalistic antics in the past was not impressed.
Mr. Blackburn referred the comments in this story as "fun and interesting". The story and statements allege Ms. Wilcox engaged in malfaesance, prostituted herself and abandoned her children. It is also alleged that the county director of public works engaged in illicit activities with Ms. Wilcox in exchange for his promotion. I do not consider any of these allegations to be interesting or fun and I presume the same for any human being with an IQ higher than 20. We should all be aghast at the indifference exhibited by Congalton and Blackburn – both alleged journalists – with regard to the erroneous reporting that David Edge changed the rules for Ms. Wilcox. Mr Blackburn your profession requires you to set the record straight regardless of your other opinions in this matter. I assume Ms. Wilcox has retained an attorney other than Mr. Hall.
Mr. Congalton,to proclaim the Ms. Wilcox is involved in EVERY decision that is made in county government is beyond ignorance. In fact, she is NOT involved in the vast majority of decisions that I and staff must make nor should she be. Engage in real investigative reporting and find out exactly how many contracts she signs off on. I'm speculating far less than 1% of all the contracts in county.
I have worked with Ms. Wilcox for many years and I have certainly disagreed with her on a number of occasions. I find her to be too direct on occasion but she may very well find me to be too passive. Fair enough. In all my interactions with Ms. Wilcox I have never seen any evidence to indicate she performs with anything but the highest integrity.
I too had disagreements with the former department head but generally viewed him in a positive light. My disagreements with him were in relation to top managers whom he allowed to engage in questionable activities.
This former department head was not discreet about his contempt for Ms. Wilcox or her office. On two occasions I witnessed him make very unprofessional and chauvanistic comments about her including using "Blondie" in place of her name. He was openly hostile to her after she called him on exxagerated material he gave the supervisors to convince them to get more employees added to his department. Ms. Wilcox orchestrated a reorganization of his department that saved quite a large amount of money and EGADS hired a woman to be his successor. Likely he is very unhappy with the positive light in which his successor is viewd.
Ms. Wilcox can ruffle feathers to be sure. But I hypothsize that most or all of my colleagues would agree that she works tirelessly to do what at least she thinks is the public's interest. It is also well known that she is routinely assigned the most difficult or controversial projects while others do not. We have her to thank for closing the money eating dinosaur hospital and orchestrating a deal with a local clinic system that costs us less but gives much more service. This money is now spent on other county programs.
If Ms. Wilcox exercised less than perfect judgement based on Mr. Edge's approval my guess is she will work to correct that. The former department head and others who contributed to this despicable charade would be wise to turn the mirror on themselves.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
Whatever happened with the FBI investigations in the North County? They had to have found SOMETHING!
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
What ever happened to the case against the sheriff for bugging the office of one of his captains? Did they ever settle the civil suit. I wish somebody would nose around about that since it really is likely to cost US some of OUR tax payer dollars.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
this is baby stuff compared to what goes on d-town. you should look into nepotism and favortism over qualified job and promotional employees.it's the old boys school run by newbes to the county, nothing new. look at gen services/ parks
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
Apparently David Edge stuck his foot so far in his mouth he can't get it out or someone told him to please just leave it in there. Although he was in a hurry to proove one minor statement in the article may have been incorrect he does not seem to have the same enthusiasm answering the hard questions that have been brought to light by his own statements.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
1) If something were to happen to Edge (God forbid) who would fill in as Administrator? Wilcox
2) This has been characterized as an investment not a princible residence. Therefore not excluded.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
I agree. I'm willing to wait a bit and see what else appears. If this is it, OK, no big deal. However, if more stories emerge and abuse seems to be taking place, then Hill, Mecham, and Patterson will have to clean house.,
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
I love how "anonymous sources" are popping up on this site and insisting that Dan and Karen (and now Congalton) don't know what they're talking about in terms of Ms. Wilcox and Mr. Edge.
What is so wrong with reporting the deal that has transpired by Ms. Wilcox and one the county's top vendors? It strikes me that there are elements at work trying to discourage Dan and Karen from digging deeper and getting the rest of the story.
Ms. Wilcox is merely an example of how lax the situation has grown. An attorney who makes millions off the county each year helps the #2 buy a house and "county employee" attacks the media and not his/her boss.
So I have to ask? What is it that certain people in the county are so afraid might come out?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
To Dan & Karen – I think your website is a great idea, and i respect you both. But on this story, you really did make a big mistake. The facts are simple. They are so simple and clear my 5 year old son could understand them. Mr Edge has clearly explained everything. Their is a '' potential conflict of interest'' highlighting the word potential. Potential doesn't mean certain. It was a mistake by Dave Congalton also to let this attempt at journalism, arrive on his show last night. I won't be listening to 920Kvec again. David Edge is a good and decent public servant. He works tirelessly for this county. He puts others ahead of himself, and know that he looks for the good in other people. Why do you look at that bad in these people Dan? Everyone has bad points and everyone makes bad choices. Im sure there are '' potential conflicts of interest every day''. So what? Look at the big picture. Hundreds of thousands die in Africa each day of starvation. Do you even bat an eyelid Dan? My God man, get a hold of yourself.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
I'm still waiting for the details on this 50/50 proposition between Hall & Wilcox or is Hll paying it all?
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
Again I will ask where is the story?
You all act outraged, as if they stole money from the treasury, or for that matter from you personally.
They bought a house together and unless someone can show me they did so with inside knowledge that the property was going to be purchased/condemned for a public works project, or some other development they have not done anything wrong.
And I still ask is there anything going on this week in county government that should be reported…..
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
Sigh wrote:
"Ron: To your primary point, you are correct and it's the point that Edge is clearly taking issue with."
Exactly. David is 100-percent right.
The story makes it seem like Wilcox and Edge got together, and deliberately manipulated the system in order for her to legally avoid a conflict of interest in buying the house.
And, IF that HAD happened, this would be one hell of a story.
But, the problem is, that never happened (and I don't blame David one bit for being pissed and doing whatever he can to try to clarify the story), and so the story goes from a killer story of government conspiracy and cover-up, to a story where there's a mild perception of perhaps some sort of conflict of interest taking place… which it's really starting to sound like it didn't. But, like Dan said on KVEC yesterday, that's for the courts, or regulators to decide.
So the heart of the story is now this: Wilcox probably should have thought through the whole perception of conflict of interest thing, and found someone else to help with the financing of the house.
A bit of bad judgement by Wilcox. Is it newsworthy? Sure. I'd say there's something there that makes it kind of readable, but nowhere near the story of top county administrators conspiring to avoid conflict of interest laws.
Now, if Dan and Karen get THAT story, that'll be awesome!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
Personnel issues with employees are often kept private. However, when higher ranked officials are involved in what looks like possible currupt capurs, the public has a right to know. And if not reported here, would the issue have ever seen the light of day?
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
I find it somewhat interesting that Mr. Edge is even commenting on this. Uncoveredslo.com has made a public complaint against Ms. Wicox. With that in mind this appears to be a county personel issue. What has happened to the confidentiality of an investigation of a county employee? Mr. Edge, his superiors or whomever should be doing an investigation into these allegations and publicly respond to them in the proper manner thru Mr. Blackburn & Ms. Velie and not thru this blog. Responding to this complaint violates any confidentiality that any county employee is entitled to when a complaint has been filed against them.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
Let's try a hypothetical. If General Dynamics was half-owner of Condoleeza Rice's house, would it matter much that Rice has no direct authority over defense contracts awarded to General Dynamics? Would anyone be quibbling over conflict reporting rules? No, it would rightly be a scandal.
Jim: "What was she supposed to do? Turn down Hall and live in the street?"
Hilarious. County apparatchiks at the $200K salary level should be just fine.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
I think we need to cut Dan and Karen some slack here. In and of itself, the Gail Wilcox story isn't all that damning, though it is troubling. I heard the show last night and Dan suggested that this was just the first in a series of stories about how the county farms out legal work.
What is painfully clear from the Wilcox story is that the people who are supposed to protect our interests, the people who are supposed to watch out for possible abuse, have been compromised.
I'm glad this story is out there. I do bellieve it is a legitimate news story. And I also think both Mr. Edge and Ms. Wilcox show poor judgment in allowing this to happen.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
Edge several times referred to this as Gails principle residence as a reason to avoid disclosure. In many other statements it has been referred to as an investment which she pays rent. If it is an investment and rental it does not qualify as a principle residence and would fall under a different IRS policy. So which is it? It can't be both. And are only principle residences excluded for reporting?
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
Elements of this story were provided to Bob Cuddy at The Tribune last April, and in writing to him in November. Wilcox's ex, Dave, is or was a reporter for the Tribune. This, friends, is our local daily newspaper. Shameful.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
Damage to the participants follows from the malfeasance, and not from the disclosure
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
I listened to KVEC and I don't get what the big deal is. I agree it looks bad, but even Blackburn acknowledged that there did not appear to be anything criminal, or in hindsight unethical. Wilcox asked her boss if Hall could help her buy a house and he said "yes". What was she supposed to do? Turn down Hall and live in the street?
If Wilcox and Hall had invested in some property that they had inside knowledge the county was going to buy/condemn then yes that would be unethical and illegal. But a residential house that Wilcox lives in? Give me a break!
If this was such a big story, how come the Tribune didn't run with it last fall when it was leaked to them originally?
Maybe because there is not a story.
Maybe the "department head" who leaked it did so in an attempt to take heat off of them.
And when it didn't catch on with the news paper they leaked it to Blackburn.
Maybe Blackburn is being used to take attention away from something else that is going on in another department of county government. Has anybody considered that as a possibility. maybe this whole thing is a ruse.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
I want to know what the county board of supervisors thinks about all this. I want to know how much rent Gail pays. I want to know if she pays half the mortgage and who takes the interest write off. How about repairs, upgrades, maintenance, is that all 50/50? This is a question that has been asked many times but there is no responce.
By: Anonymous on 6/5/08
There is a problem with the language regarding disclosure by Gail. Yes the language existed prior to her job discription being changed and the language was rolled over to accomodate her. The question is why was she exempt from reporting that she had made a financial arrangement to purchase a home with Hall to begin with? There is a conflict of interest unless it's been 50/50 all the way. I have yet to hear the facts surrounding her arrangement and it is the public's business. I plan to get those facts.
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
Which brings up the obvious. Why doesn't Edge just copy this whole thing and present it to the staff at the fair action political commitee now. That would put an end to all the sniping right now. Or maybe not.
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
Yeah, I have to agree about why not ask the fair political practices commission. What you would expect to see in a situation like this is that, an official as high up as Ms. Wilcox is, she would at the very least ask of the county's legal counsel whether this transaction posed a legal or ethical conflict, not to mention the appearance of a conflict. Why haven't we heard from Ms. Wilcox or Mr. Edge that "hey, we even asked our attorneys and they said, there's no conflict." One would have to presume they didn't ask, or that would be the first defense; which leaves us with this — why didn't they ask? to dumb to figure that out, or maybe they just asked this
Mr. Hall.
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
to sigh
Bullsh*t. Edge was playing musical chairs with the chain of command. Every time Karen or Dan quoted an exact source of information as to who said who reported to who he would change his story.. Or is this Snidley Whiplash himself I'm addressing?
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
Sounds like if you are down and out a whirl around the block with this Gail Wilcox would not only give you a boost with your self esteem but probably your pocket book too.
Somewhere in this blog it said there was a classification change to save the county some money. Did Wilcox take a pay cut when this happened? If so maybe that is why Hall had to buy her house for her.
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
Sigh says: They don't want Official County Documents to be able to be 'copy and pasted' as a protection against fraud
If so, it's a dubious "protection," that only serves to keep government information harder to access. (A hypothetical fraudster would not be deterred by a scanned page.) More likely it's just antiquated procedures. The County website, especially the government section, is pretty poor overall.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
Ron: To your last point first, I believe that is intentional on behalf of the County for document integrity and protection. They don't want Official County Documents to be able to be 'copy and pasted' as a protection against fraud.
To your primary point, you are correct and it's the point that Edge is clearly taking issue with. There was no 'alteration' of the reporting rules. Blackburn's initial story is factually incorrect. It implies that there was a change to the reporting rules to exempt this acquisition from being reported.
The only thing that happened is that this county used to have two Deputy County Administrators and when one of them retired, it was decided that it would save the County money by removing a Deputy CAO and creating a single Assistant CAO position.
This resolution does nothing other than specify that the new 'Assistant CAO' position has the exact same reporting responsibilities as the previous 'Deputy CAO' positions.
The fact that Blackburn himself has backed off on the language that he used in his piece in regard to this issue is proof positive that he now realizes he was in error.
The issue originally was one not only of potential conflict, but also an implication of a cover-up.
The bottom line is that rules were not changed or altered so that Wilcox would be exempt for reporting this transaction, contrary to the original story. The only issue that remains is whether or not there is a conflict of interest in this transaction or a possible conflict of interest in the future, should Wilcox be put in a situation where she provides oversight to Hall's contract.
What was written as a huge story based on the premise that rules were changed so Wilcox could enter into an (assumed) profitable agreement with a vendor, has now been diminished into a story about personal judgment based upon other's perceptions of impropriety.
Big story becomes little story.
I will say, however, that the level of sexism contained in the basic assumptions of the article as well as the responses in this thread have been quite refreshing. Maybe I do have something in common with all you damn hippies after all.
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
I'm open minded but I have more ?????'s than ever. David Edge sounded like a "con man" and I really was open minded. I think it's time for the FBI, seriously.
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
Gail has been xxxxxx everyone, including me. Gail left her husband recently.
The public should ask how did the new public works director get his job? He was seen with her also. Need to fish in a different direction.Sounds like she plays the field. Gail's first interest is Gail, not the county.
Hey did you know in addition to her salary she gets a car allowance of around $400 a month +. I am so happy to see that Gail might finally gets whats coming to her.
They call this "Karma" I have sat and watched her in action and she is rude and ruthless during bos meetings. She makes people feel little. I was embarassed that the board did not stop her from her action in certain meetings. She will chop you at the ankles if it makes her look good. She will lie to the board and twist the truth. I have seen it. I can't wait for changes. I wish the public could really see whats goes on in Admin. :-)
I am so happy that we will have two new board members. I think Wilcox & Edge should pack their bags.
Hey David, Maybe you should do another employee survey…do you think anyone in their right mind would tell you in a recorded email what we really think.
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
I really thought this was a non-issue until Snidely Whiplash (David Edge) got on the radio tonight. Sounds like they (David and Gail) worked every avenue to make it so Gail did not have to report this deal. To include changing her job title and changing the chain of command. This wasn't so obvious until Edge tried to back track his way out. David I think thee do complainst to much. The political fair practices commitee has staff available to answer these exact kind of questions. Why were not they contacted on this. Guilty on all charges!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
Who cares who leaked the info. It is an news issue when a county official gets involved in money dealings with a vendor. How do you know it is someone in county counsel? I don't care about Gail's personal life. I do care about possible misdeeds by government big wigs.
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
Oh and another thing. This whole little story got started because attorneys at county counsel "leaked" it to Blackburn, who in turn ran with it.
The attorneys at county counsel are upset with Edge and Wilcox because they have been working for three years without a contract. Poor babys, maybe they should go into private practice and then they can pay their own office rent, para legal services, nexis/lexis fees, etc. That is if anybody would hire them…..
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
"Wilcox walked out on her husband and kids"\\
I don't know what happened between her and her husband dave, but if those two rug rats she was shopping with were not her kids, then whose kids are they? And no they were not Clay's kids; I know both of them.
As to Wilcox and Hall having something on the side; what are you nuts! Clay, luv ya man, but get on the jenny craig!
And as far as this whole story goes its another attempt by Dan Blackburn to create news out of nothing. If Dan were really the hard working reporter he wants us to believe why is he writing for a blog? Leslie Parilla, of the Tribune, can be a pain in the ass, but I will say this about her, she is hard working, persistent and reports the facts as she uncovers them. Maybe she could take Blackburn under her wing…
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
Should Mr. Edge choose to respond I would think that it should come through county Council or an appropriate representative from the County since there are some pretty serious charges made here.
The response should actually be made as a public statement that is issued to all of the media, they can choose how they want to handle it.
Mr. Edge answering these blogs is not the correct to address the issue which needs to be made available to the entire public not just bloggers.
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
No, I think it actually is David Edge's duty to respond. UncoveredSLO has raised a legitimate question about a possible ethics violation, and presumably they–and you–want to know the truth. Despite the nonsensical conspiratorial trash that many of the bloggers have posted, the original question remains legitimate.
Only those not interested in the truth would wring their hands over David having taken the time to respond. Is it your recommendation that he not respond at all? Too often, public officials are accused of ducking a controversy or shielding the facts from disclosure. Here, David is shining a light brightly on the facts, asking that they be made available to a skeptical public and inviting a fair interpretation.
Unfortunately, there will always be a minority of the idiocy fringe who will be satisfied with nothing less than scandal and cover-up and, even when scandal clearly does not exist, they will invent it.
Some of these bloggers have raised legitimate questions about propriety, and it's the job of the County to explain itself. But too many of these comments represent the masturbatory fantasies of the worst gutter trash that our society can produce.
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
Hyeah…them county fantzy-pantzes with their suits and ties and computurs with spell-check. They think thayre so smart! Who does Edge thynk he is responding to a press story?! He's in govmint! He's supposed to stonewahl, dag nabbit!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
Hey David at work today? Spending alot of tax payer time and money responding to this… A violation of your county policy… Due you think?
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
I wonder if blogging is part of David Edge's job discription? His blog today at 1:24 pm is probably why he may not be available to the general public. Just another expose of the wasted money within the county government.
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
From Dewdog:
Why don't we make this real simple and have the parties produce the following information:
1. The source of the downpayment for the residence, is it 50-50?
2.Records of the monthly payment, is it 50-50?
3.Rents received, is it at market rate?
4.Insurance premiums, is it 50-50?
5.Property taxes paid, is it 50-50?
6.Property maintenance, is it 50-50?
7.Any contractural agreement between the parties stating the "investment" agreement.
If the answer to these questions show a 50-50 partnership I have no real problem with the transaction. If it's not a 50-50 transaction there needs to be some explanation to justify this 50-50 "partnership."
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
And – so the readers get all the information – here is my response that UncoveredSLO chose not to publish:
Mr Blackburn, I can't believe you continue to dissemble on the wording.
As I pointed out in the blogs the quote from the story was not a problem of "better choice of words",- it was not true – I expect journalists, in particular, to get the facts correct. If you had identified it as language "rolled over" that would have been accurate. What you actually said was a fabrication – there was no alteration – conspicuous or otherwise.
Why is this so critical – because, by creating the impression that we made some changes that excluded Gail's real estate deal from disclosure that would previously have been required, you insinuate deliberate malfeasance.
If you chose to pitch a story about the house purchase that opined – "while there was nothing illegal or underhanded about the arrangement one can question Ms. Wilcox's judgement because there could be a perception of conflict of interest" – then we could have a legitimate discussion. That isn't the choice you made.
Here are some facts that you didn't pick up –
1) the disclosure categories for Ms. WIlcox's position (or its predecessor) were established in 1977 and have been unchanged since that time.
2) while you make much of the code excluding "Disclosure Category 3" from the ACAO (Wilcox) reporting requirements, in fact the house purchase in question would not be covered by Category 3. It would be covered under Category 1 "Interests in Real Property" – and, as state law provides, would not be reportable anyway because it is her principal residence.
So, if you hope to get back to what you call the "real issue", then you first have to correct the completely wrong statements that you made in the original article. I'd assumed originally that you had the source material, I now wonder if you actually do. If you do not have it I will be happy to provide it to you. If, after seeing that material, you still stand by your language in the article then you are simply engaging in a reckless disregard of the truth.
David Edge
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
We sent this e-mail to County Administrator David Edge this morning:
Mr. Edge — While we were considering your pair of e-mails, you posted on
our site with comments substantially changing the tenor of the dialogue,
and placed it into a different arena. Hence our tardy response.
Intentional or not, the exclusion of "Disclosure Category 3" from the
resolution you presented to supervisors March 20 regarding Ms. Wilcox's
disclosure requirements was at least interesting. Wilcox was then in the
midst of closing a real estate deal with Clay Hall — one you had already
approved and one which proceeded during the period 12/06 through 5/07.
Whether new or "rolled over" from previous years, the exclusion takes on
special significance in light of the Wilcox-Hall real estate venture. We
all know why personal residences are generally excluded from financial
disclosure forms. This is logical. But in the Wilcox-Hall situation, this
"personal" information becomes something quite different. This is not the
kind of privacy issue the exclusion intended. The words "rolled over from
prior codes" would have been a better choice of words than "alteration".
But the Wilcox reporting requirements and exclusions were noted for
supervisors who approved the "newly adopted" resolution.
I hope this helps get us back to the real issue of potential conflict. If
you want to talk, call me. Thanks.
Dan Blackburn
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
Ahhhh… well done, Sigh…
I guess the county handles past agendas differently, because, usually, with the current week's agenda, they have the staff report link just below each item.
In exhibit B of that staff report, it does say just what Dan says it does:
“Investments in, and income from, any business entity doing business with the County and engaged in (a) the acquisition, sale or lease or development of real property; (b) provision of insurance brokerage or consulting services; or (c) provision of consulting services of the type which have, in the past two years, or which with reasonable foreseeability, may be utilized in the next one-year period by the filer’s particular division within the Department.”
However, what's confusing, to me at least, is I don't see how it's this:
"Along with that change was a less conspicuous alteration; newly adopted requirements for Wilcox’s conflict reporting now specifically exclude this particular provision"
How does that Resolution "specifically exclude this particular provision," just like David asked? I don't see it. (But I may just be missing it.) All I see are a couple of title changes.
(And, I've said this before. The county has GOT TO make those pdf staff reports copy-and-pastable. Scanned pages suck! Not only can you not copy-and-paste from them, but scanned pages also make the document impossible to electronically search… and scans make the file size larger. David, please!!??)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
That's because you linked to the agenda, not to the minutes. The staff report in question is available on the website and clearly shows the only change to the Conflict of Interest Code was the updating of two job titles.
There's no specific exemption for a particular piece of property as was implied by the article.
http://slocounty.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view...
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
Dan will be on Dave Congalton's radio show tonight at 5:05 p.m. to discuss this story. Tune into KVEC 920 AM or listen live at 920KVEC.com. Call in and voice your opinion.
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
Dan wrote:
"Fact: Edge brought a resolution to supervisors March 20, 2007 (Agenda Item B-14, p.7) “updating the conflict of interest code… to reflect two title changes due to classification changes.”"
I thought I gave a good lesson here a few weeks back on how to provide a link, and, like I originally wrote when I provided that lesson, the ability to link directly to a source is where blogs blow print away.
Here's the link to that March 20, 2007 agenda.
David wrote:
" If you want to "stand by your story" then tell us what, specifically, was "altered", as you claim, other than the name changes.
Tell us what these "newly adopted" provisions were."
Good questions. It'd be interesting to see the staff report for that item (which is NOT linked up to the agenda) because that's probably where those answers can be found.
Perhaps Mr. Edge could provide us with a link to the staff report for that item.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
Quoting David Edge: "There is no conflict of interest issue for the county because, in her job responsibilities, Ms. Wilcox has no decision-making role concerning the Hall/Hiatt contract with the county and the work that they do for us."
Even if this is technically true on the org chart, and even true in fact, it's not unreasonable for citizens to be suspicious about an appearance of conflict. We all know that formal lines of authority are not always the whole story, and there are significant amounts of money involved in the home purchase and the county contract.
Any kind of coziness between a high-ranking county official and a significant county contractor is probably a bad idea regardless of the letter of the conflict rules, and if Mr. Edge doesn't know this, it's surprising.
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
A topped out Deputy County Counsel or Deputy District Attorney currently earns $61.15 per hour in basic salary. They are not eligible for overtime because they are salaried.
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
I've read that Hall's legal firm is the only qualified firm to do business with the County. Do you really expect us to believe that? Just go to the courthouse any day and there are attorneys everywhere trying to sue people, defend people or harass people and whatever else they do while punching the time clock. If the county can't find someone there then maybe they can let their finger do the choosing for them. All they need to do is go to the yellow pages and look under attorney. There are pages and pages of these characters willing to do anything for a buck. To even make it easier there pictures are included.
This whole thing appears to be a scam.
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
It seems like Mr. Hubbard is concerned about this revelation. Uncoveredslo.com is THE watchdog for SLO County. If there is nothing wrong then no one should be worried. Being in the public arena exposes one to some tough questions at times. Uncoveredslo.com has asked the questions. And now all we are doing is waiting for those questions to be answered. If there not any conflicts of interest I would imagine that the answers will be provided immediately. If there are no answers then we will have to assume that the accusations are correct. Wilcox, Hall and Edge it's time to provide us with the details of what appears to be a wrongdoing.
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
How many other financial scams has HALL done for friends? And been approved by the ever-vigilant county counsel's office
How much have other attorneys, like ERNST and MATTISON received – they were the prior county attorneys and gave the $1M contract to HALL?
How much has Hall's attorney PAL and local lawyer SCOTT RADOVICH received -weekly lunch pals?
THESE SHOULD BE THE NEXT SERIES OF QUESTIONS?
This certainly doesn't start and stop with Edge, Gail and Deb?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/4/08
Yes — Please do look into who really supervises Ms. Hossli. It's well known that the task is frequently left to Ms. Wilcox to "deal" with Ms. Hossli. Edge doesn't know how to supervise; case in point — former Chief Probation Officer, John Lum. No question that Mr. Edge will attempt to cover-up this fact (that Wilcox does in fact oversee Hossli), but by all means investigate it! Someone please investigate it! King David is corrupt, arrogant, ruthless, and offensive. What's wrong with the Board of Supervisors — why don't they get it?
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Hopefully the press will figure out how to get the stories for good journalism. Like all the stories about your inappropriate comments, your corruption, your poor judgment in condoning county officials actions that create not merely an appearance of impropriety but actual impropriety — like your old cronie, John Lum and the hot tub with the juvenile. Gee — let's see could that really be a conflict? And now you defend your employee for equally bad judgment. It's well known that Ms. Wilcox and Ms. Hossli are great friends, and so how convenient that it's Ms. Hossli who contracts or handles the billing and assignments that Hall's firm gets. Oh yes, and who hand picked her? Let's see wasn't there a story a couple of years ago about not the fact that she did have the requisite qualifications for Risk Manager? So you made her that anyway and then orchestrated a reorganization of the Personnel Department to make her the head of it? A Human Resources director with a gutter mouth — smart move there! And it's all about town how you publicly bash county employees for earning too much money and getting exhorbatant pension benefits. What's your salary . . . $175K? What part does your administration have in the fact that the county's retirement system is now hugely underfunded? What deals were cut there? Come on press, start collecting the information!
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Just like Mr. Edge to pass the buck and claim the recommendation to amend the conflict of interest code came from County Counsel — in his 10 plus years as County Administrator has he ever taken personal responsibility for anything. So, let's blame the recently deceased County Counsel. And who is this Jenson guy — there aren't any other firms in SLO who can handle the type of defense cases given to Clay Hall. You're kidding right? Where did you come from? I say the press should request all the billing Hall's firm submits. Bet the public would find that this Ms. Hossli, Wilcox, and Edge use private counsel as their private attorneys. So let's pay Hall how much an hour, as opposed to the $45 bucks or so paid to public attorneys. Yeah, that makes sense. What's wrong with these Board members?
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
I intend to call the FBI in Santa Maria tomorrow and tell them about this article.
And I intend to forward a copy to my new county supervisor ADAM HILL.
Watch your back, Mt. Edge!
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
It is irrelevant what county law says when it conflicts state and federal law. Federal and state laws prohibit corruption often hidden as an alleged innocent act of conflict of interest. Look at the facts, a top ranked county employee’s home is subsidized by a county vendor. I guess it is SLO county and we are to slow to catch the inferences here? I don’t think so.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Hey Pension Plan Blogger — Yeah, isn't Ms. Wilcox one of those "contracting" (as opposed to civil service) officials who gets a $500 plus automobile allowance each month. Talk about corruption. . . and her office is soliciting ways to save money in the county budget. Gee, now let's see $500.00 x 12 months. Does she travel anywhere on county business?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Well, well…Mr. Edge, Ms. Wilcox, Mr. Hall, et.al.: Please pack your bags and don't let the door hit ya… We will have a Board now who will take back their mistake in giving Mr. Edge so much power to appoint department heads, a task previous to the Board of Supervisors. When given to Mr. Edge, he promptly removed the Civil Service protection of department heads, and put his minions in who must support him or basically be fired. All corrupt from the get go. Mr. Patterson, Mr. Hill, Mr. Mecham…clean house. Thank you.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Who the f are you? What "facts" are incorrect in the story? Did Gail leave her husband and two children for you???? Just wondering.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Thomas Jefferson once said, "The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man
who reads nothing but newspapers." Nowhere is this more true than tabloid journalistic hit pieces, such as this blog article by Blackburn and Velie. Not only did the authors fail to get all their facts straight before writing this article, they spun the few pieces of truth in such a way that betrays their anti-county government bias.
As for the commenters following the article, how many of you have actually attended a Board of Supervisor's meeting? How many of you have actually read a Board item and researched the information before forming an opinion about what you perceive to be corruption and conflicts-of-interest in County Administration? How many of you can lay out the entire job description of Ms. Wilcox in order to discuss intelligently what she does for the county (and does well, I might add) in exchange for what she is paid? How many facts do ANY of you know first-hand (directed primarily at the despicable individuals who questioned Ms. Wilcox's family values and loyalty to her children)?
All this blog article proves is when there is no story there, the story must be manufactured. No more, no less.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
I am surprised that David Edge is wading into this online controversy. He zeros in on a specific issue, but is ignoring the larger concern.
He signed off on letting his No. 2 get into a business deal with a county vendor? Wow. That stinks.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Tsk tsk David, thou does protest to much. Freaking out a bit are we?
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Mr Blackburn – I'm disappointed that you try to avoid the real factual errors in your story.
The following is a direct quote from the story:
"Along with that change was a less conspicuous alteration; newly adopted requirements for Wilcox’s conflict reporting now specifically exclude this particular provision"
Let me reiterate my earlier comment – that statement is not true. As I told you in the my e-mail to you and as the Board item itself shows, there was NO such change made to the conflict code language – NO "alteration" conspicious or otherwise. and NO "newly adopted requirements…"
If you want to "stand by your story" then tell us what, specifically, was "altered", as you claim, other than the name changes.
Tell us what these "newly adopted" provisions were.
In fact you know, or should know, that all provisions from the old conflict code document rolled over unchanged into the new code document. Your paragraph, that I quoted, is – simply – a fabrication.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
First, the county cannot decide that it is exempt from conflict requirements established by state law. If that was the way things worked, SLO County would probably legalize slavery. Wilcox seems to think that if her boss says it's OK to get involved financially with a multi-million-dollar service provider, then it's OK. Are these people daft?
Second, there's only one story here, and that's the fact that David Edge wouldn't know a conflict if it hit him between the eyes. Is there anybody out…there?
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
First, the key piece of this story is that it looks like there are inappropriate and illegal relationships between the number two county employee and a contract company head. Numerous laws, enacted to protect the taxpayer, make this a criminal act.
Second, are you worried about the consent order only because you are the name behind it or is it a way to detract from the primary issue, probable bribery? Cover your ass type mentality. Sorry David, anyone with any degree of code knowledge will find uncovered to be correct.
Third, Deb and Gail are great friends. Wasn’t there an occasion when the two were out drinking and driving past an ex-boyfriend of Debs house that prompted Deb to throw a large pot though her ex’s window. Charges were filed and the Tribune covered the story.
Forth, isn’t principal administrative analyst Dan Buckshi, an employee that reports directly to Gail, who then responds to Edge.
Sorry David, but this stinks.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Dan Blackburn
So, if the county specifically excludes one particular individual, than its not a 'CONFLICT OF NTEREST". How can I insert resolutions into laws where I would be exluded from any wrongdoing? That issue must be eplored.
Thankyou Dan Blackburn
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
We stand behind our story. David Edge raised his issues in two e-mails with demands for retraction. We avoid arguments with readers; but Edge’s comments require clarification.
Fact: Edge brought a resolution to supervisors March 20, 2007 (Agenda Item B-14, p.7) “updating the conflict of interest code… to reflect two title changes due to classification changes.”
Fact: Edge’s resolution approves the proposition that the residence of the assistant county administrator is not subject to conflict of interest requirements. Gail Wilcox’s house is specifically excluded.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Who cares. Let's pull out that puddin' spoon and scrape that barrel.What happens to this site when our little county runs out of corruption stories. Oh ya…corruption…it's everywhere! LOL
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
David Edge
You clarify some issues, however when it comes to 'CONFLICT OF INTEREST" this should have passed the smell test. When someone works for a governmaental agency making deals with an outside provider, there is always a problem with potential conflict. It was unwise to enter any type of deal between the two. Both should have know better ragardles the merritt of the issue. Its public confidence.
Daniel Blackburn owes no apology by providing a public service with such a potential magnitude.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Thanks Mr. Edge for your post. Uncoveredslo.com should man up and print the truth.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
As I said on my first post there is nothing to this other than to torture somebody.OK now you can all start again.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Sorry for the funky spelling errors.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Mr. Edge,
Thank you for taking the time to post your response to the article. I agree that the potential discrepencies in question are material and, if confirmed, should be ecknowledged and corrected.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
I meant to include my name in the previous "anonymous" comment . I am the County Administrative Officer and Ms. Wilcox is my employee.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Some people have said they want to hear from the county on this issue so – for anyone interested in the truth – the key piece of this story is wrong – plain wrong.
Specifically – there was no change in Wilcox's "conflict reporting requirements" made in the March, 2007 Board item. The ONLY change made by that item was to the position names. NO other language was changed at all.
Further, the adopted provisions contain NO language "specifically exempting Wilcox's residence from the conflict requirements" as claimed by the article.
I want to assume Mr. Blackburn simply made a mistake. However, I advised him of this factual inaccuracy as soon as I read the story yesterday. I have had no response from him, nor has he seen fit to publish a correction. At this point, it seems to me, he is recklessly disregarding the truth.
Now to the issue raised – Ms. Wilcox and Mr.Clay's family did jointly purchase a house as reported. This was done openly and above board.
There is no conflict of interest issue for the county because, in her job responsibilities, Ms. Wilcox e has no decision-making role concerning the Hall/Hiatt contract with the county and the work that they do for us.
Hall/Hiatt works for the Risk Management Division supervised by Deb Hossli. Ms. Hossli was appointed by the Board of Supervisors and reports to me. Wilcox is not in the loop.
In other words – there is no story here about Wilcox. There is simply innuendo and insinuation – not good journalism. The real facts are all readily available. I encourage anyone interested in the truth to examine them completely before jumping to conclusions.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Cindy says:
How old are you? I want a pic too! No husband please!
I get a job at the county and you can have everything.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Tip of the iceberg uncovered. Keep digging uncovered there's lots of government lawyers who are doing deals. How much are we paying government lawyers who are sitting around coming up with laws that old man sunny acres can break when he is taking care of people the county abandoned? what other behind closed door deals have been arranged? A county lawyer named Ann Dugan tried to do a closed door deal to get her husband one of those big dollar contracts but was finally stopped. Like this other dame she has walked away from the old man and kids. Maybe because he did not get a fat contract like the others in the investigation. But there's much more lurking behind the door of the courthouse. go get 'em!
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
liam = santa maria bill
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
To anyone who is in a position to award me a no bid contract that will gross me $1,000,000. per annum. Here is my promise.
My husband and I will be your best friends.
We will even go “halfsies” on a home for you to live in.
We will pay the taxes and charge you very low rent to make it seem all legal.
If you have a boss we will be his best friends too.
OR/AND
If you have an employee who might get too close to our arrangement, I’ll be their best friend too. We will all live happily ever after.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
I want pictures!
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
NICE! NICE! NIDE!
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
The County Grand Jury which has subpoena power should look into this. No more, 'I'm in a meeting all day,' or 'we can't find the paperwork,' BS.
Frankly, the county is likely to never respond to this Web site. You folks need legitimacy, you need to use the public records act to force these documents out of the county.
Gail Wilcox was involved in another scandal some time ago, can't recall what it was, but it was something about her being promoted to a new job that she wasn't close to being qualified for…
Perhaps some of you will remember.
Good story
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
You are obviously a jerk. To declare someone an idiot because they might mispell a word and make a typographical error just shows what you really are-probably a Cal Poly professor. I guess in your world someone that is not equal to your standards is an idiot and not worthy of making a comment. Once again you are a jerk.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
To the two individuals who posted just after mine:
"Pity Pity.." You think you know more than you do. Your ignorance is plain to see, but your cruelty is appalling.
And to "To Liam"… Check your math on her salary. You're not even close. Tell us which law was broken, and tell us why you should have the tiniest ounce of credibility when, after making those first two mistakes, you prove your idiocy by being unable to spell words that are on my children's elementary school reading list. Yes, I'm sarcastic and admit it, but you're either ill-informed, uneducated or just plain moronic.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Possibility 3. Regardless of *good friends* and all that they still broke the law. They should have known better and Gail earms 200K a year so why would she need her friends to go *halfsies* on a house unless she is a blooming financial flake who is managing the county budget. Grow up, stop with the niavety, give us all a break and loose the sarcasum with the tin foil hat crap.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
What "tragic thing" happened in Gail's life? SHE WALKED OUT ON HER HUSBAND AND TWO CHILDREN. Any tragedy she suffered, she caused.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Possibility #1: Gail, Clay and Clay's wife are long-time friends and business associates. Something tragic happens in Gail's personal life and, as good friends sometimes do, Clay and his wife help her out by agreeing to go "halfsies" on a house. Maybe not the best investment, as it turns out, because of the timing, but–hey–this wasn't really about investments, it's about friendship. Add in the fact that County Counsel is the one that reviews conflicts, and that the Board of Supervisors approves contracts, and Gail's on the periphery of that legal loop. From the outside, okay, it looks worth questioning, but there are your answers.
Possibility #2: Oooooo! Gail left her husband for Clay and he's sneaking around behind his WIFE'S BACK and he bought a house for his new g/f Gail!! And *giggle giggle* you know what HIS return on the investment is, don't you??? WINK WINK and the whole gubmint is CORRUPT and vote for MY GUY not THEIR GUY and….
Oh, c'mon. Grow up, and get real. You're all acting like retarded schoolgirls, giggling over who kissed Johnny went the lights went out. Take off your little tinfoil hats and show some maturity.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Is Wilcox at work today? Any body seen her or is she hiding from the public. I want to see some records. Like Halls invoices.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Engaging in sexual misconduct. Is there any proff of that? It doesn't sound like it's common knowledge. Very few bloggers have mentioned that they knew that sexual antics were a part of all this.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Please consider this insider info:
An INVESTIGATION should be immediately undertaken by the BOARD of SUPERVISORS and the GRAND JURY in order to determine if Mr. Hall has VIOLATED the State Bar California Rules of Professional Conduct for Attorneys, affecting his continued retention in his $1,ooo,ooo.oo no-bid contract with the County.:
1. Wrongfully enetring into a business transaction with a client [rule3-300]
and,
2. Wrongfully engaging in sexual relations with a client [rule 3-120]
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Take a look at the deed and Clayton Hall is there. It was he who said that it was his wife's investment. As an attorney he should know better than to make that statement. As an attorney he certainly knows what community property is. This could be the first shovel into the hole that is going to bury these 2 along with Edge.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Why is everyone so upset about Wilcox. Her boss Edge told her it was OK. I wonder what he has been getting out of all this? Just look, I bet you'll find it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
With all of the problems that Atascadero is having with their city attorney, city manager and the brawling city council maybe Wilcox and Hall would fit right in at Atascadero.
All of there problems just seem to get swept under the carpet and business goes on as usual.
An E ticket to bankruptcy.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
It strikes me rather funny to think about the possibility (as implied earlier) that Hall and Wicox might be making each other extra extra cozy. Come on, Wilcox is living in a home that belongs to 1/2 Hall's wife. Now thats a good one. On the other hand Hall and Wilcox have already engaged in careless behavior. Whatever they are thinking it isn't very smart.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Just a note;
The Feds are looking into the DA's lack of interest in the EFI and Hurst case, so this issue is something they will uncover.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
This is not whether Hall wins or loses his cases or how much he saves the county. It's about how much he is awarding county staff in order to maintain his no-bid arrangement with the county. It's called graft or corruption whichever word is the easiest for you to understand. Irregardless of the record this is a reckless way of doing business which can and uusually does lead to abuse, such as we are seeing here.
The expense account would be very interesting. Also it would be very very interesting to see his time cards for the work performed. Like most attorney's I'm sure you would see some double dipping.
Changes need to occur and they need to happen real quick.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Concerning this question of "conflict of interest". I can understand that Gail might not have known better but what does this say about Clay? As an attorney he certainly should have known what the ramifications were. I can only assume that he didn't care or thought no one would find out.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Who the hell do you think that your kidding, US? Sorry Spot but there are ethics rules and laws in place for a reason. It looks like some have not only been skirted but mis-represented.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Hall doesn't "win" most cases. He settles cases after he charges absorbent fees and files all sorts of motions and drags them out. After he makes enough money he does was he should have done in the first place. He settles it. The tax payers end up paying two to five times the amount that they should/would have.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Well. I guess Goldwater told us! Dan Blackburn will be on Dave Congalton's 920KVEC talk radio show Wednesday during drive time @ 5 p.m. to talk about this little deal and a whole lot more.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
It's always amusing when people — Edge and Wilcox in this case — flatly deny the potential for conflict of interest simply because there's no apparent direct conflict. Such denials would have more credibility if they could acknowledge at least the appearance of a conflict and address it honestly, instead of pretending that it doesn't look bad.
People in government have to meet a very high standard to avoid understandable suspicion, especially in a case like this involving the awarding of contracts and significant amounts of money, and that standard goes beyond the letter of the rules about conflicts.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
So Wilcox and Hall decide to practice a little capitalism and invest their own money in a house hoping to make a profit. BFD!
Hall and Hiett have been doing legal work for the county for 20 years; and it wasn't Gail Wilcox or David Edge that signed their first contract with the county.
They continue to represent the county because they are a competant firm that wins far more cases for the county than they lose. This means that we pay out less tax payer money to people looking for a free ride on the county. That is money that goes instead to programs at drug and alcohol services, the parks department, the road department, etc.
The people criticizing Wilcox and Hall sound like a bunch of whiners who would rather sit on their ass and wait for a handout instead of working for something.
As for Wilcox's salary, what do you think executives are paid in both government and the private sector? How much does Warren Baker, the President of Cal Poly make? I don't hear any of you lambasting him and the investments he makes with his money. Probably because he is an "educator" and they are above criticism…
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Thank you Whistleblower. You are a true patriot! This stinks so badly. Somebody needs to call the F.B.I. or report this to the local Grand Jury.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Please consider this insider info:
1. The County pays Hall more than $1,ooo,ooo.oo PER YEAR for legal defense.[Multiply that by 20 years of service?]
2. Hall has NOT taken a County defense case to trial in over 10 years.
3. Instead, Hall SETTLES the claims, paying out hundreds of thousands of dollars to claimants.
4. Check out Hall's EXPENSE VOUCHERS to see him spending taxpayer funds on wining and dining Wilcox and Hosli.
5. Hall can be seen regularly on his KID's baseball field well before 4:00 pm. during his "work" week.
6. This type of easy money has enabled Hall to open ANOTHER OFFICE in Santa Barbara.
Does that explain WHY he would buy his boss a house?
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
New addition to the Webster's new world dictionary:
fbleg=nimby
It it was not for growth most of us would not be able to live here. You should consider others and just yours, Patterson, Gibson & Adam's personal agenda.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Please delete comments that are off topic — these allegations are far too serious to ignore. County employees need to be posting what they know about Edge and Wilcox.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
I'll stay on topic and applaud Karen and Daniel for getting us this story. I hope there will be follow-ups because this sure stinks bad.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Patterson has been there 4 years, Patterson 2 years.
Name one thing they have done to stop this corruption.
Did they rubber stamp the conflict of interest policy
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Newsome, get a clue. On the viewshed ordinance: The original staff recommendation from county staff protected land that included land owned by Gibson. The "Protect our property rights" fringe group had an alternate proposal that protected many fewer acres of viewshed- not including Gibson's property. When the vote was up for the staff recommendation for adoption, Gibson recused himself because it directly affected his property. Our three "turn SLO county into Orange County" supervisors, Lenthall, Ovitt & Achadjian, voted not to adopt the staff recommendation. Then they took up the POPR proposal, which did not affect Gibson's property. Thus, Gibson, had no conflict of interest, and voted against this gutted ordinance with Patterson which passed 3-2 with the help of the "SLO will be Orange county" crowd. That's the facts on this.
If you want SLO county to look like Orange county vote today for Lenthall.
If you don't want to repeat the mistakes that Orange county has made with regards to sprawled growth, traffic congestion, and toll roads, vote Hill.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Gibson and Patterson are the first dope smoking SLO supervisors ever and if Hill wins there will pot shops on every street corner.
Go Adam!
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
BEWARE OF INSIDER. He/she slimes every blog. We have learned not to respond to him (unless you agree). He will not stop otherwise. He is obsessive and always tries to turn the topic on the blogs to Wal-Mart or hating Brennler. He occassionally cahnges names but you will learn to spot him.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Don't be fooled. Gibson & Patterson have their network of Good Ole New Boys that have their own special agenda. Nothing new here they are all the same with the exception that the New Ole Boys want to take your rights away.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Can these Comments be correct? Wilcox has been seen out on "dates" with Hall???? Is this why she walked out on her children and husband???? We need some answers. Fast!
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Cindy Sasur: Wasn't Gibson conflicted out of the viewshed debacle early on? Then didn't he end up voting on the issue in the end? I am not sure that story has fully played out yet.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
I'm just amazed that anyone thinks that politicians will solve this problem! One way out: from UncoveredSLO.com-to-Attorney General-to jailer.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Change the Board majority today, Elect Hill, re-elect Patterson, and we will rid our county of this criminal behavior!!!!!
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Gibson is a nightmare just in it to take his niegbors property rights at ever turn. As to Patterson Ditto.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
I's say Edge, Hall and Wilcox have to go.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Patterson & Gibson are both honest and stay away from the "Good Ole Boy" clans. They have never had a conflict of interest. They are the peoples, people.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
The Edge administration is crooked and demoralizing. Wilcox became Edge's attack dog, and now we see that she's been lining her own well tailored pockets. I hope we see a new Board that will clean house of this corruption. Bye Bye to all the good old boys (and girls).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
This is beginning to sound like a Clinton-Lewinsky affair.I wonder if Hall has a large desk and smokes cigars, And you want the liberals Gibson and Patterson to clean this up?
If she loses her job and the lawyer loses his no bid arrangement with the county they can apply to Gibson &
Patterson and apply and receive the first approval for a marijuana distribution center to supplement their 'income."
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
I've heard that there have been some "irregularities" in the county's pension plan. Supposedly the DA's office is looking into this. Does Wilcox and Edge have anything to do with the pension plan? Does this Hall character give advise on the pension plan? This entire issue could be a bombshell within the county governemnt.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Wilcox & Hall have been seen out on "dates" recently!
They are descreet but this is a very small area to try and hide in.
Someone is going to lose a job on this deal…or a "no bid" contract with the county.
This stinks to high heaven!
Hite a private investigator and get to bottom of this fast!
Wlicox has been slinking around since this came out!
Dig deeper! Let's end this crap now!
And folks wonder why few trust government!
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
WOW, We are new to this site. There sure is a tremendous amount of excellent reporting going on here. I haven't had a chance to read the blogs yet but the stories are very informative. I'm glad to know there is someone like Carol and Dan around doing this. Thanks, I'll tell my friends and so will Arlene.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
I agree that there is a lot more to root out. This trully is only the tip of the ice berg. I work for the county and some of us have talked about questionable activities in the past. I'll ask some of my co-workers to come and read this. It seems that salaries, perks and deals come before the best public interest with some of our officials. I'm a county employee but I'm a tax payer and citizen first, so are my children.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
I don't know much but I do know that the firm Hall, Hieatt & Connelly are paid on a by case basis and they charge hourly fees. Some cases have cost the county in excess 250K in fees. I also know that there is has been no obvious change in her job duties or her salary. If she isn't in charge of the budget any more I don't know who is. Certainly not Deb (I hope not) I don't think she would be qualified unless she has two different diploma's/degrees.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
See how much the Halls contributed to the Lenthall and Ovitt campaigns.
There's more. There's more.
Thank you Dan & Karen. Root out this rot at the center of our county government!
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
I encourage everyone to contact Jim Patterson & Bruce Gibbson. They won't take this minkey business lightly.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
Since when is it the duty of the Human Resource Dept to award and over see outside legal contracts? The HR dept oversees the hiring process of personnel and is the Employee advocate. The HR dept upholdsall state and federal laws pertaining to employment.Outside legal servives is something that doesn't fall within the realm or guidlines of the Human Resources Director. This whole deal reaks of payoffs in one form or another.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
What are the responsibilities of Gail Wilcox? What is her relationship to Hall?
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
If the county farms out all of its legal work, why have so many attorneys on staff? This seems a prime way of cutting back the budget and saving $$$$$.
Someone please call Bob Cuddy at the Tribune and tell him to wake up.
By: Anonymous on 6/3/08
I'd like to see the no bid contract that someone has provided to Hall and his firm. I'd like to know what they have been paid and what the billing was on a per case basis or do they get a fixed fee? I hear they are paid hourly! Doesn't sound like a good deal for the citizens to me. Sounds like a taxpayer rip off. I want the records tomorrow.
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
The obvious quesrion is whether or not this is the only house Gail Wilcox owns.
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
Who is kidding who? Does anyone know of anybody who was buying property (particularly a single family residence) in 2007 as an investment. We have two surposedly intelligent people purchasng a home together as an investment last year. But what I really want to know is who decided that Wilcox is worth 200K a year to the tax payers? Someones head needs to roll. I'm really very angry about this. Even 100K is a lot to pay her.
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
Contact Patterson & Gibson. They will do something. Contact county Employee's and get all the info you can, then post it here. Encourage Employee's to post here anonymously. Stand Up Now.
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
So, Hall could not find ANYONE else to invest with, other than the administrator for the county responsible for his "no-bid" contract.
Edge, who has a questionable history of his own, thinks it's no problem?
fishy? I smell a rat.
Time to clean the house.
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
We need to become the media we need on the Central Coast. It's obvious that the local media lacks the resources or the energy to get involved. The watchdog function is dead except for here.
Here is what we need to do. Everyone who reads this article needs to email it to (1) anyone they know who is a county employee and (2) email the link to Jim Patterson and Bruce Gibson (3) any friend who you think might give a shit about what is happening inside the county building. The more people know, the better.
Meanwhile, we've got to get county employees who might know about Gail Wilcox to post what they know on this site anonymously. Your identity will be protected. What can you tell us about this woman other than she apparently walked out on her family?
Contact the Tribune and ask them to investigate. If they won't do investigate reporting (1) cancel your subscription or (2) pull your advertising.
This is the moment. We have to act. Nobody is going to do this for us anymore. We've got to do it ourselves.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
Whilcox & Hall may be shadowing Cunningham. You may have turned the light on here. Wouldn't it be interesting how Wilcox may have furnished this "rental" home? Now I wonder how she may have purchased her vehichle unless we the taxpayers are providing one for her. Looks like there are going to be many more things to look into. I don't think I'd want to be on Blackberry Ave. tonight let alone go to the government center tomorrow.
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
Once again we find ourselves getting important information from only one media source. Where would we be without Dan and Karen?
TRIBUNE! NEW TIMES! KSBY! KCOY! CONGELTON! WILL YOU GUYS WAKE THE HELL UP AND GO OUT THERE AND DO SOME REPORTING????????????
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
Look, something stinks at the county building. There is still time for us to do something: Go to the polls tomorrow and vote for Adam Hill and Frank Meacham for supervisors. We new new blood with sharp eyes.
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
Tell us whats going on over there. What do you know? What is Wilcox positin, powers, friendships and relationship with Hall?
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
I think someone needs to complain to the board of supervisors. I also think Karen will have more info later.
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
Interesting article.
A real estate deal brought down a very arrogant congrasman who "WAS" above the law. He only got 8 years in the big pan. What a county!!!!!
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
With all of the reported corruption going on in this county I certainly hope the voters will vote for the right people tomorrow. We will definetly need people that will support the Sheriff and build more jails to house these criminals.
I hope the common sense candidates, Lenthall and Arnold, who know the difference between right and wrong are put in place so that these scoundrels will be processed to conclusion.
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
I want to see te escrow records, trust deed, mortgage payments and are they 50/50? Rent payments, etc. Cough it up Ms. Wilcox. I also want to know how many cases went to the favorite law firm and how much they were paid in the last 5 years. Someone needs to examine the contract and the billings. This stinks
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
Excellent reporting. Thanks for the update. Please keep us all posted, I know there is a lot more to al this. Its time for some jail time. I'll bet there is more clandestine activity going on here than has already been uncovered.
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
Who do you trust?
Remember that lawyers are at the top of the list of those who are trusted the least. Even Realors and car salesmen get more respect than lawyers. Could the result of this story only confirm those FACTS?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
They say that "where there is smoke there is fire". I see the kindeling burning. Keep looking, it's about to get real big.
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
Stay tuned, hopefully the truth will come out on this blog.
$200,000 a year and you can't afford to buy a house so you get the vendor that does your work to buy it for you. I think that is graft. If they bought it together I would love to see the loan application and see if Wilcox was even mentioned. If it's a 50-50 "deal" it will be interesting if Wilcox and Hall are splitting the costs 50-50. If they arn't there is definetly a financial advantage for Wilcox from the lawyer Hall.
Sounds like it could be a definite conflict to me.
If they are on the up and up they will provide the necessary documentation for a clarification of this issue. If they don't, it will only get deeper.
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
Ms. Wilcox walked out on her husband and two young children recently. I have zero sympathy for her.
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
Sorry if I wasn't clear on who bothers me.
1) I appreciate this website and the digging Dan and Karen do. They are expert journalists, and we need them to continue.
2) Conspiracy theorist BS and drawn conclusions from the peanut gallery is stupid, insipid and unfair, particularly to the "players" in this story. Posters like that were the subject of my wrath and will continue to be so. Christ, we're not in Atascadero!!!
If there is wrongdoing, let's let it be brought to light, then disparage the doers. And if there's wrongdoing, Wilcox, et al, deserve public humiliation on this site. Right now there is only the appearance of wrongdoing. So keep it in you pants.
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
What in the hell is this? You mean to tell me that she is earning 200K annual! That is outrageous. Who the hell determined that sort of salary? Another thing, what's this crap about not not taking bids and giving 75% of all the county legal work to one law firm? Somebody neegs to look into this bull and I mean right now.
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
This is way too fishy. I'd like to rest of the information. A waiting answers from the county.
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
Uncoveredslo.com has proven that they are a legitimate reporting source. You can keep yours in your pants and I'll return the screwing that we taxpayers have been getting from the likes of Wilcox, Hall and Edge.
Silence on articles like this are no longer accepted and hidden by other news reporting agencies. Uncoveredslo.com is doing the county a creditable job of finally being a source to tell us the truth.
If you like it the way it is keep it in your pants and your fingers of the keyboard.
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
Who in the world would decide to began real estate investing in April 2007. Not a very good excuse. I would expect more from the only local attorney with the where with all to do county litigation.
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
whatis going on in this county? Looks as if evryone is in on something while the taxpayer must pony up more and more. If they invest for a higher return, they are milked, if they have any penny left, they just have to give it away either in legal fees or taxes.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
All of you commenters seem to be clamoring for dirt, and crying foul.
I think you need to put it back into your pants until the full story comes out. Could be it just LOOKS bad.
Nice job of uncovering, Karen & Dan. Keep up the good work.
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
Wilcox got divorced? What are the chances that she walked away with little or nothing-slim to nothing. If she is making $200,000 a year and can't buy a house she is holding down the wrong job at the County as far as I'm concerned. I guess if this is true we may have some of the answers why the County is running out of money.
This changing titles and special exemptions for Wilcox's is really looking dirty. Too bad Hillary isn't going to be the nominee, it looks like Wilcox and her lawyer buddy would fit in very nicely with the Clinton clan. Could she be the Monica Lewinsky of San Luis Obispo?
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
I'll bet they all wish they could put the bullet back in the gun on this one since they probably have lost 100k in value since that purchase date.
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
Maybe this is an example on how the County Planning Department is going to put an affordable housing program together for the needy.
I guess the requirements will be that you make at least $200,000 a year, then a vendor for the County will purchase the house and put your name on the title. You then pay rent, at which rate we don't know yet and everybody is happy. Of course the happiest person is the lawyer Hall who keeps doing the business for county on a no bid arrangement. I wonder if he is getting the $800 or $900 hourly rate that was paid to the retired judge to investigate the Sheriff. Has anybody looked into to see if the judge got in on the affordable housing program for the County?
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
This is nothing like the North County hard money deal. Sounds like she was getting divorced and needed a new home. She knew someone with money who she most likely met through her time at the county. So she got together with this atorney or him and his wife or just his wife if you are to believe them and bought a house for investment purposes that could be sold at a future date with the profits being split. Gail probably pays fair market rent "maybe less" then her and the wife split the rest of the costs for the mortgage, taxes, HOA, etc. Sounds perfectly legal and small potatoes. This is going to come down to very poor judgment on both thier parts and could cost Gail her job and the law firm a plumb client. Very Very poor judgment. I'm sure they thought they were doing Gail a favor and making an investment at the same time. The perception of conflict is however all it takes to create havoc for both parties. I say let it go. Even as it stands Gails career is duly damaged at this point.
By: Anonymous on 6/2/08
This smells fishy to me. Wilcox is one of the highest paid persons in the County and has an attorney who gets most of the County's work buy her a house? Why didn't she buy it herself? She supposedly owns half of the house but only pays rent? It will be very interesting if we see who is making all of the payments like the mortgage, insurance, taxes etc.. Wilcox says she is paying rent? I wonder if Hall is declaring that on his taxes? Is she paying market value for the rent?
I guess if they are clean we should have all of this information tomorrow, that is if they are available and out of meetings. Or, we are going to get a quick lesson on "lawyering up" 101.
EFI, Hurst and Gearhart I think you guys are going to the back page on this one. The mud from the mudhole is cresting the grade and going downhill. This is going to be an education on the tip of the iceberg theory.
Once again a great story from Dan & Karen. Is any other news agency going to address this?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0