PATRICIA W. PERLOW Lane County District Attorey - PAXOMLY (ut eb 3950, (euysnzezst Case EVALUATION Suspect: Joseph Paul Pishioneri DACase No: — 039-293907 Agency: DOJ cy00127-16 Officer: SA Michael Bethers - DOJ Attorney: Erk V. Hasselman DACaseNo.; 203907 Date: December 6, 2016 No Action Code: NAEI Reason for not fling case: Insufficient evidence to prove charge(s) beyond a reasonable doubt. Instructions regarding evidence: The evidence in this case may be released and does not need to be retained by the agency. Explanatioi ‘This investigation was initiated by the Oregon DOJ at LCSO’s request. CSO learned Dep. Pishioneri had utilized regular paid work hours and a ‘County-owned (LCSO) vehicle to attend a conference related to his role as Springfield City Councilor. Facts: (On August 2, 2016, Lt. Riley, Captain Buckwald, Sgt. Bones, and Dep. Pishioneri had a meeting regarding Dep. Pishioneri’s duties. During that ‘meeting, the topic of Dop. Pishionori’s recent attondance at a conference in Bend surfaces. The conference was the annual conference for the Oregon. Association of Clean Water Agencies, and was held from July 27-29, 2016. During this meeting, command staff learned that on August 1, 2016, Dey Pishioneri had coded his time card as regular work hours for this multi-day ‘event, and had asked permission (and been granted permission, around (07/25/2016) from Sgt. Bones to utilize a LCSO vehicle to travel to and from (case EvaLuaTion aoe 1oF4the event. Dep. Pishioneri indicates during this meeting that hi code the time as leave time. ‘On August 9, 2016, Dep. Pishioneri contacts payroll and asks them to tecode his time during the conference as Code 40 (Time Management). ‘On August 12, 2016, Dep. Pishioneri receives notice that Lt. Riley has levied a formal complaint against him for his behaviors. ‘On August 13, 2046, Dep. Pishioneri reaches out to Matt Stoudor (city of Springfield) asking how he could reimburse the City of Springfield for mileage. Turns out, the City of Springfield issued Dep. Pishionori a per jem and mileage check ($229.09, 07/15/2016) for his attendance at the conference on behalf of the City of Springfield. (On August 15, 2016, Dep. Pishionori reimbursed the City for the mileage advance ($138.24) he received July 15, 2016. ‘On September 13, 2016, DOJ SA Bothers interviewed Dep. Pishioneri (accompanied by his counsel, Michael Staropoli) regarding the complaint. Dep. Pishioneri claimed ho attended the conference on behalf of the City of ‘Springfield, but also because he thought it was relevant to his job “arranging work for sheriffs office work crews.” He indicated that he re-coded his hours to personal leave time after the ‘meeting with command staff in order to “avoid any conflict. Dop. Pishioneri maintained that by attending the conference, “there was a ‘connection to” his duties at LCSO, and that he “had been attending MWMC (Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission) events with prior ‘The DOJ investigator appears to accept that answer in investigation did not show clear intent for Pishioneri to ‘coneluding “t keep the mileage reimbursement that he was not entitled to.” Analysis: Itis clear that Dep. Pishioneri accepted a check from the City of Springfield to cover mileage expense on his personal vehicle, then abtained permission from Sgt. Bones to take a LCSO vehicle to the training. Of note, ‘Sgt. Bones apparently did not make an effort to determine whether Dep. Pishioneri was using the vehicle for a work-related purpose, but rather assumed that he was. Itis similarly undisputed that Dep. Pishioneri, within a few days of returning from the conference, coded his time sheet to reflect the County should pay him wages for attending the conference. ‘case EvaLuaTiON Paae2or4Because it was unclear to me why Dep. Pishioneri would be under the impression that attendance at the Oregon Association of Clean Water ‘Agencies conference would be pertinent to his LCSO duties, | asked Chief Deputy Cliff Harrold to determine from Dep. Pishioner'’s current and former ‘command staff whether Dep. Pishioneri had been previously tasked with this sort of liaison or representative duties. Sheriff Trapp and former Shoriff Turner both denied any such permission. ‘Tho same was true for Capt. Buckwald, and Lts. Frency, Riley, and Brown. During the investigation, however, Sgt. Bones told SA Bethers that he ‘assumed Dep. Pishioneri was attending the training on behalf of the Sheriffs office and that “Deputy Pishioneri’s attendance was approved by former sheriff's office administration.” When | personally questioned Sgt. Bones as to where that “permission” originated, Sgt. Bones said he couldn't realy tell me, and that he thinks he actually just learned that from Dep. Pishioneri without actually having a command source verify it. | posed the same question to Dep. Pishioner''s attorney, Michael Staropo! Mr. Staropoli responded by saying that Dep. Pishioneri believed that there ‘would be attendees that would be positive contacts to continue soliciting contracts for the LCSO work crew. “Unfortunately, they didn't attend.” Mr. Staropoli also provided me with some meeting minutes for the MWMC, which indicate that in a past meeting, Councilor Pishioneri suggested using the LCSO work crew for landscape maintenance. He gave mo Matt Stouder's name as a contact to verify Dep. Pishioneri’s involvement with MWMC and his promotion of the work crew to that commission. In speaking with Mr. Stouder by phone, he confirmed Dep. Pishioneri’s promotion of the LCSO work crew to the commission, and his belief that Dep. Pishioneri had the best interest of LCSO and the City of Springfield i mind. Mr, Stouder acknowledged, however, that aside from that meeting in February 2045, he could not recall Councilor Pishioneri doing any other liaison work on behalf of LCSO at any other meetings or events. | find Dep. Pishioneri’s explanations of his use of LCSO work time and an LCEO vehicle unconvineing as conneetod to hic omploymont. It appears the Oregon Association of Clean Water Agencies conference in Bend was completely related to his position as Springfield City Councilor. There no credible suggestion that he was representing LCSO at this event. The fact he applied for and received per diem and mileage reimbursement from the City of Springfield is clear evidence of his representation of the City at this event, (case EvALUATION Paoe30r4‘Similarly, Dep. Pishioneri's apparent claim that he might have contact with ‘someone at the conference which might ald LCSO's work crew contracts is, unconvincing. According to Chief Deputy Harrold, Dep. Pishioneri has no connection to the organization and function of the LCSO work crew. It appears Dep. Pishioneri attempted to get paid wages by the County for a conference he was attending for the City. It similarly appears that he used a county vehicle and fuel for attendance at an event related to his position lor. As such, it appears he obtained benefits he was not sd to obtain. Contrary to the conclusion of the DOJ investigator, I find that probable cause oxists to believe that Dep. Pishioneri committed Theft in the Second/Third Degree and Official Misconduct in the First Degree. | conclude an objectively reasonable person would understand that Dep. Pishioneri only resolved his apparent “double-dipping” once his use of resources was discovered and questioned. There is no evidence to suggest that he attempted to reimburse elther agency until confronted by his LCSO superiors. In fact, he filled out his timecard claiming entitlement to wages, rather than personal leave, after the conclusion of the event. Notwithstanding that conclusion, | do not bolieve a charge, on the record. bbofore mo, can be established boyond a reasonable doubt. Such a conclusion is restrained by an apparent lack of defined duties, allowing Dep. Pishioneri to self-proclaim he was representing LCSO at these commission functions, as well as Sgt. Bones’ permission to use the county vehicle upon Dep. Pishioneri’s request. Because this office concludes that Dep. Pishioneri’s explanations lack erodibility when compared to the evidence and timing of his remedial ‘efforts, we will be flagging Dep. Pishioneri on our Brady list. We currently have no investigations in which Dep. Pishioneri is an intended State witness. However, any further investigations in which he could be called as a witness will be compromised by this finding and our duty to disclose the contents of this investigation in future criminal prosecutions. Case EvausToN Paces or4