Former Planning Commissioner pleads the Fifth - AuburnBookmark & SharePlaceropolis.com Favorites Fark Digg Del.icio.us MySpace Facebook Google Live More ... To: From: Note: Your Local News: Highway 49 bringing Americana fusion to Club Car in Auburn Subscriber Services Search: Stories Photos All Advanced Search AuburnFolsomRosevilleRocklinEl Dorado HillsColfaxLincolnLoomisGranite Bay Weather Forecast Sponsored By: Icon Hearth & Home News Local Sports National Sports National State Education Business Election 08 Obituaries Crime Logs Living Home & Garden People Health & Fitness Faith Food & Wine Movies & Music Milestones Auburn's Icons Motoring Arts & Entertainment Columnists Inside the fishbowl Opinion Editorials Letters to the Editor Submit a Letter Staff Blogs *NEW* Our Photos Our Videos *NEW* Special Sections Things to do FAQ How To Videos Contact us Editorial Staff Subscriber Services Online Advertising Rack Locations Submit a News Tip Submit an Announcement 7/29/08 | 1039 views | 19 comments | Former Planning Commissioner pleads the Fifth County says investigation will continue By Jenifer Gee Journal Staff Writer Michelle Ollar-Burris A former Placer County planning commissioner was granted Fifth Amendment privileges by a judge Tuesday. Michelle Ollar-Burris will not have to testify in a county civil suit filed against her and two other parties. George Wasley, a consultant on Ollar-Burris’ parcels, and Thomas Van Horne, a Sacramento attorney and developer, were also named in the suit. Wasley and Van Horne were also granted Fifth Amendment privileges, which means they will not be forced to testify against themselves. The motion, however, to delay discovery part of the case was denied. Therefore, the county can pursue its investigation. During its investigation, county counsel cannot use a deposition from the three parties granted Fifth Amendment privileges. A trial date has not been set. Ollar-Burris is accused of conspiring with Wasley and Van Horne to subdivide several lots without going through a final subdivision map process, which is more costly than a parcel map that was approved for the properties in question. Specifically, the county suit charges that the three violated the state Subdivision Map Act, county Planning Ordinance and state business and professions code. All three maintain they are innocent. The defendants sought amendment protections to protect themselves from a possible criminal suit if one should be filed, according to Brigit Barnes, Wasley’s attorney. The county, however, said it would continue its investigation. “Discovery will go on,” said Anthony La Bouff, county counsel. “The county is eager to continue discovery in this case. We think we’ve been discovering lots of good things.” La Bouff said the county’s ongoing investigation of a “very deep and complicated conspiracy” has taken a “long time to completely understand.” “As we continue to work on it, we understand more and are all the more convinced on the merits of violating the map act.” He added that while the amendment privileges granted to the defendants may delay the trial date, it would not slow the county’s work on the case. According to a March deposition from La Bouff, he was aware of an anonymous letter sent to then-planning director Fred Yaeger. The letter discussed Ollar-Burris’ lot splitting activities but did not reach the depth of investigation by special counsel the county hired in May 2007 to investigate the matter, La Bouff said. When the letter was first shown to La Bouff, Yeager told him not to investigate it because he was turning it over to the District Attorney’s Office, according to a March deposition from Yeager. It was in early May 2007 when a reporter from an area newspaper interviewed La Bouff about Ollar-Burris’ activities that encouraged La Bouff to approach Supervisor Jim Holmes and County Executive Officer Tom Miller about researching Ollar-Burris’ activities, according to La Bouff’s deposition. On May 22, 2007, Rick Crabtree was hired as special counsel to investigate the matter. In November 2007, the county filed a suit against Ollar-Burris. Barnes said she would continue discovery on behalf of her client, Wasley. She said she instructed Wasley to request Fifth Amendment privileges in case a criminal suit is filed. She added she is trying to protect her client as much as possible. “In some ways it (Fifth Amendment privileges) hampers me,” Barnes said. “If I put him on the stand he could completely clear himself. “But to one extent, it’s not what I want to do because of the possibility of criminal action. They’ve already sued George. I don’t know what else they would do.” Ollar-Burris and her attorney, Michael Vinding, were unable to return comment as of press time. The Journal's Jenifer Gee can be reached at jeniferg@goldcountrymedia.com or post a comment. Keywords Michelle Ollar-Burris, Anthony La Bouff, subdivision map act, civil suit, George Wasley, Thomas Van Horne, Brigit Barnes Not registered? Click here Share this Comments 19 comments on this item Remove scrollbar Replace scrollbar Report inappropriate comments On 7/29/08 at 06:17 PM, chunga wrote: A civil suit. That's why elected officials think they can get away with anything. Ethics is just a word. I just don't understand what the fifth amendment has to do with civil law. If these people could tell the truth there would be others found to abuse the SMA. Real estate brokers have a stake in this trial. On 7/30/08 at 12:52 AM, gulliver wrote: First she indignantly protests her innocence then fires a countersuit. Now she and her cohorts cower behind the Fifth Amendment. County Counsel should ask the District Attorney to grant immunity to Wasley and Van Horne so they could be compelled to testify truthfully about their scheme. The goose is in the oven and will soon be cooked. On 7/30/08 at 06:10 AM, Ishmael wrote: Anthony La Bouff must summons Bruce Kranz, the unindicted co-conspirator in this nauseating case of "hush my mouth",so the truth that will never see the light of day may see the light of day. Kranz, who has run roughshod over our community, can be stopped in his tracks by his involvement in OB's crimes. Kranz may be culpable in this case as well ,but, at the very least, he should know what took place since he appointed her, knowing who and what she was/is. Maybe Kranz will also ask to hide his culpability behind the fifth amendment; the public will know for certain OB and Kranz have moved further into the shade of the dark side. Kranz and Doolittle, Doolittle and Kranz; if one goes, they both must go. On 7/30/08 at 08:34 AM, SunValley1 wrote: The only one who should be granted immunity is Wasley. Van Horne has a hugh finiancial stake in all of this and hides behind his "laywer" status. He's just as much a crook as OB. I had several confrontations with him and had to hire my own lawyer to protect my property rights as they were developing Sun Valley Road. BTW: They still continue to develop Sun Valley Road with county permisssion. Drive by and see what's happening!! More lot splits. And another BTW: The SacBee article that named names didn't get eveybody involved. There were more RE folks than just OB. I know, I watched it all happen. On 7/30/08 at 09:45 AM, down3over1 wrote: gulliver, OB filed her suit against the county first. That may not have been a smart move on her part. I can see the county filing suit as part of their defense as well as their responsibility to uphold the map act. As pointed out by SunValley1, a quick trip out there shows they are still developing (probably their right) along Sun Valley Rd. with what looks like recent grading in Codfish Creek. Wonder if these people have contacted all the appropriate agencies and obtained all the required permits. Considering the fact that she served on a commission that was suppose to enforce the laws/ordinances she is accused of violating, I'm glad she no longer is a peace officer. Again, thank Bruce Kranz for his contribution to this mess. On 7/30/08 at 12:24 PM, fourgen wrote: What department of Placer County needs to be scrutinized? Someone took the applications, processed the maps and this information lead to permits being granted, this was happening before OB was appointed to the Planning commission. How many other individuals have used the "parcel map" to illegally split property and how long has this been going on? What does La Bouff mean? “The county is eager to continue discovery in this case. We think we’ve been discovering lots of good things.” Where is the District Attorney in this case of "conspiracy"? Ishmael aka Jack Sanchez, maybe the "good things" will help your cause, you really need to take something for your hatred. Transparency is not one of your elevated "suits". Your rantings are at least consistent. On 7/30/08 at 01:56 PM, gulliver wrote: down3over: No, the county filed the action originally, and THEN OB filed her cross-complaint, most if not all of which was thrown out by the court after the County made a procedural motion called a demurrer. fourgen: The "discovery" La Bouff refers to is the formal legal process of obtaining information by interrogatories, depositions, and subpoenas. "Discovery" is a legal term of art. On 7/30/08 at 08:35 PM, common_sense wrote: Ishmael: how in the world can Bruce (I hate private roads) Kranz be an unindicted conspirator in this ? was his name on the title anywhere ? has he been charged with anything in connection to this ? Tying him to Doolittle, that works for me though. One point for you. For this post, you're even. On 7/30/08 at 09:15 PM, fourgen wrote: Dah gulliver, I taught it had something to do with a bay. I didn't question "discovery", been there done that. I didn't know what the "good things" that "discovery" had developed constitute. I have never heard that being or doing things illegal could be referenced as "good things". gulliver one more little note for you: the term demurrer has been replaced by "motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim" (called a "12(b)(6) motion" in federal court). On 7/30/08 at 11:10 PM, gulliver wrote: fourgen: Your post made me assume that you did not understand La Bouff's use of the term "discovery". Just trying to be helpful. As far as the term "demurrer" is concerned that term is still used in state court proceedings, which is what we are talking about here. See for example California Code of Civil Procedure Section 430.30. The demurrer, as you found out by reading the Wikipedia article, is no longer a recognized pleading under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This is nothing new and dates back, I believe, to 1938. Believe it or not, fourgen, I actually know what I am talking about. On 7/31/08 at 09:01 AM, chunga wrote: The SMA was not meant for the continued splitting of land. There is a waiting period. lol SunValley one is correct these private subdivisions skirt the law when it comes to improvement permits and enviromental analysis. RE agents and brokers use questionable tactics to arrange financing and pass the parcels back and forth to cover their tracks. The full imact of these private subdivisions has never been adequately addressed. I believe it is a lack of understanding of the SMA's intent. This is not confined to Placer County and is reeking havoc all over the state. It's time to amend the SMA to prevent abuse. I don't expect that to be done any time soon. On 7/31/08 at 11:56 AM, concerned101 wrote: SunVally1 is right about Thomas Van Horne. I also have had involvement with him and have been privy to his shady business dealings for quite sometime....Hopefully he will be exposed and punished for all his dishonesty and illegal activity beyond his involvement with OB. On 7/31/08 at 12:11 PM, loretta stiles wrote: Yes, where is the DA? AMAZiING, On 7/31/08 at 01:52 PM, down3over1 wrote: Seems like there is some problem with the current work on OB's Sun Valley Rd. parcels. Someone informed me that there is a stop work notice posted on the property. On 7/31/08 at 04:03 PM, SunValley1 wrote: You are correct. Just walked back there and it is FINALLY red tagged. I filed a compaint with the county on July 15 and they just now post it. In the meantime, OB has completely destroyed the environment and almost completed the road. Tagging it now is like closing the barn door once the horses have escaped. I wonder if this wasn't their plan all along. On 7/31/08 at 08:30 PM, fourgen wrote: gulliver, not wiki, it was found on NOLO which is considered a knowledgeable source. Nice try but you failed to answer the real question. " I have never heard that being or doing things illegal could be referenced as "good things". What good things is he referencing? Can I depose you once we get though the interrogatories? On 8/1/08 at 09:43 AM, kcampbell wrote: The Ollar-Burris lawsuit is nonsense. Placer County looked at, checked for compliance with the Subdivision Map Act and approved ALL those splits and they did not see a problem... they approved them! The original Sac Bee story on 5/27/08 quotes the current planning director: "Placer County's current planning director, Michael Johnson, said Ollar-Burris' activities have raised no red flags for him since he took the job in October 2005. "We checked all the parcel maps that come in for compliance with the Subdivision Map Act," Johnson said. The department checks to make sure the same person is not subdividing a parcel more than once, he said, and looks for patterns involving the same people." That same Sac Bee article states Ollar-Burris used multiple names... well ya, the story also reports she was married, divorced and remarried- that combined with a trust and you get multiple names.... duh. The Bee also reports that Fred Yeager, before retiring in 2005, gave the Placer DA all the information. This is 2008 and the DA has done nothing. Another anonymous group gave the Placer Grand Jury and the Placer DA information about this in 2006 and again this is 2008 and the DA and/or the Grand Jury has done nothing. Violation of the Subdivision Map Act is serious stuff carrying serious penalties of up to a year in jail and a $10,000 in fines. The County spent at least $30,000 to hire a special lawyer, Richard Crabtree, to investigate. Crabtree spent 6 months (May to November 2007) to investigate Ollar-Burris and he filed a report. The report was posted on the web and having read it I can tell you it can cure insomnia. So Placer County Counsel Tony LaBouff told the Sierra Sun, "The report has been shared with the Placer County District Attorney but criminal charges are not expected to be filed against Ollar-Burris." I wonder, after spending all that taxpayer's money and taking all that time, if they can't find anything... i.e. they are not filing charges... could that mean she is innocent?? So they file civil charges to recoup any costs of criminal activity, but there is not any criminal activity. It is now estimated that these dimwitted county lawyers have spent about $250,000 of taxpayer's hard-earned money. According to the Sac Bee article Fred Yeager gave all these charges to the Placer DA before he retired in August 2005... there seems to be indication he gave it to the DA in 2004... so how much more time and taxpayer's hard-earned money is needed???? I am willing to bet that if Bruce Kranz is not re-elected; this whole thing goes away after November 4th. If Bruce is re-elected this will go on for another 4 years and another $250,000 of taxpayer's hard-earned money down the drain. It is amazing that Ollar-Burris is found guilty in the court of public opinion, but in legal courts there has been no evidence of wrongdoing. This is a modern-day tragedy, and when this is all said and done, I hope some heads roll with the county... and though Bruce Kranz can't do anything, it is too bad the other four supervisors don't have the courage to tell the county attorneys you have had enough time and spent enough taxpayer's money, either dump or get off the pot. Enough is enough! Any one of us can be a Ollar-Burris... the county can spend years and tons of taxpayer's money to investigate us... and come up with NOTHING--- and ruin our lives as they have done with Ollar-Burris. On 8/1/08 at 04:39 PM, BLUEBIRD wrote: Dear kcampell You need to get a reality check. Did it ever occur to you that the county does not revolve around the 5th district electorate race? It sounds like Bruce Kranz and camp are suffering from egomanical paranoia. "They are out to get me" "It is all about me" Visit your docter and get on some meds. You are not as important as you think you are, neither is Bruce Kranz. Possible ongoing violations of the map act have county wide, and long term ramifications that are more significant then the upcoming Bruce Kranz election. On 8/1/08 at 04:46 PM, gulliver wrote: Ken Campbell: "Any one of us can be a Ollar-Burris", you say? Well, I suppose if I wanted to use 8 different names to make multiple transfers of property back and forth between co-conspirators and turn a 100 acre parcel into a 20 parcel subdivision without benefit of proper roads or infrastructure, yes I suppose I could. In which case I could join OB in pleading the right to remain silent, under the 5th Amendment, on the grounds that whatever I said might be the basis of a criminal prosecution. Sanguine as you may be, Mr. Campbell, that there is no criminal conduct, OB and her attorney obviously believe otherwise. Admit it, your boy Kranz is toast. Post a comment You must be logged in to post a comment. click here to log in. Sign me up! Learn more Log in PLACERopolis Close Sign in: E-mail address: Password: Forget your password? Sign up! Learn more about Placeropolis Pix Blogs Vids Stories Users Best Friends Z-z-z-z-z Beautiful Kitty Best Dressed Cat See More Pix >>Small Town USA What is it about small US towns that makes them so charming, alluring, and welcoming … more Berries abound in Loomis & other news bites Last night, we picked blackberries in our yard for dessert. With access to water, … more Mountain Mike's makes big comeback Down seven runs with time ticking away, Mountain Mike's beat the clock and … more << Staff Blogs See More User Blogs >> Bell Road Concert Series Granite Bay Long jumper prepares for Junior Olympics finals Roseville screams for ice cream Old School Baseball Camp See More Vids >>Target I have worked for the Auburn Target on the 4am Shift. Yeah I know bright and early … more North American Union: Wanted Dead or Alive U.S. | Indymedia North American Union: Wanted Dead or Alive by Dana Gabriel … more Commerce Bank of Folsom Changes Name, Adds Branch Commerce Bank of Folsom Changes Name, Adds Branch FOLSOM, Calif., August … more See More Stories >> NatureCalendar kg_karas SusanLeeGiles fnpople See More Users >> ACCOUNTING CLERK, P/T Loomis Basin Veterinary ASST GENERAL MANAGER & SALES MANAGER SpringHill Suites by Marriott PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE/SMALL TOOL REPAIR JD2, Inc. PHYSICAL THERAPY AIDE, P/T James E. Pogue RPT, Inc. View all Top Jobs Contents of this site are all Copyright © 2008, Gold Country Media. All rights reserved. Powered By: Creative Circle Advertising Solutions, Inc. Privacy Policy Terms of Service