The lengthy story of a proposal to bury Los Angeles County trash in San Bernardino County took a surprising turn when San Bernardino County's long-time planning director was indicted on charges of allegedly hiding, altering or destroying public records and lying about it in a sworn statement. Land Use Services Director Valery Pilmer pleaded not guilty after being indicted in late January by a special San Bernardino County grand jury investigating the Rail-Cycle landfill project. She has since been placed on administrative leave. Planners and local government experts in California and around the country could not recall a similar criminal indictment of a county planning director. Dr. Jim Mulvihill, a California State University, San Bernardino planning professor, said he was shocked by the indictment of Pilmer. "She is about as prim as could be. It's almost like the school librarian was indicted," said Mulvihill, who has known Pilmer for years. Other municipal planners were also surprised at the indictment of their respected colleague and wondered about the incident's effect on how they do business. "I think it's unfortunate in a way," said Leonard Garoupa, president of the California County Planning Directors Association. "I think this kind of thing has a chilling effect on how the public perceives how we do our job and how we interact with project applicants." Pilmer's lawyer, Dennis Kottmeier, contended the planner is a victim of a district attorney's office that has exceeded it bounds. "I think to a certain extent the DA's office manipulated the grand jury to get the results it wanted," charged Kottmeier, the San Bernardino County district attorney from 1981 to 1995. Ironically, the indictment stems from an investigation of a development that never advanced beyond the proposal stage. Waste Management Inc. of Irvine and Santa Fe Railroad in the early-1990s proposed Rail-Cycle — a giant landfill at an abandoned railroad depot between Amboy and Cadiz in the Mojave Desert about 100 miles east of San Bernardino. The plan called for rail cars to deliver up to 21,000 tons of trash a day to the landfill. Despite opposition from desert residents and environmentalists, county officials approved the project. But voters in 1996 defeated a business license tax that was essential for Rail-Cycle to go forward. Project proponents pressed their case with the county, but the landfill stalled. Now, three years later, Rail-Cycle is alive only in a grand jury investigation and in criminal court proceedings. The county pursued the Rail-Cycle project to help fill government coffers, explained Professor Mulvihill. At the time, the county budget was suffering and county administrators were laying off employees. Importing garbage from Los Angeles County seemed like a sure money-maker, he said. At some point, law enforcement authorities acquired interest in the garbage-on-rails proposal. On March 7, 1997, the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Office executed search warrants for the Land Use Services Department, which includes the planning department, Waste Management offices in Irvine, and the homes of Waste Management executives. Deputies carted away more than 100,000 documents from the Waste Management office, according to a report in the San Bernardino Sun. A group of eight to ten law enforcement officers spent seven hours in the planning department rounding up Rail-Cycle documents, according to Kottmeier. However, investigators apparently did not get what they wanted from the planning department, so the district attorney's office sent the planning department a request for the rest of the information. Pilmer assembled more documents and on June 17, 1998 signed an affidavit – prepared by the county counsel – stating that there were no further related documents in a conference room. In fact, there were files remaining in the conference room. Kottmeier said the incorrect affidavit resulted from a miscommunication between Pilmer and the county counsel. A planning department employee told the grand jury that she and a co-worker saw Pilmer carry a file marked "Rail-Cycle" out of the planning department after Pilmer had been advised not to remove such documents because of the investigation, said Dan Lough, San Bernardino County assistant district attorney. He contended Pilmer concealed public records and logs of who removed documents. Kottmeier said Pilmer did nothing improper and the co-worker's testimony put Pilmer in the difficult position of trying, nearly two years later, to reconstruct in her mind what file she took home that night and what she did with it. "We don't know what file it is or whether it was ultimately turned over to the DA's office," Kottmeier said. The group of officers armed with search warrants had seven hours to locate and remove any documents it wanted from the office, he added. Pilmer's carrying home a file after officers departed is not suspicious because she regularly took home files to review, he said. Garoupa said planning directors often take home files and they frequently alter staff reports on development proposals because such diligence is necessary to handle complicated issues and projects. Members of the planning directors association discussed Pilmer's case shortly after her indictment and will closely monitor the outcome. "We've all known her for a while. She's a highly respected and professional person," Garoupa said. Pilmer's indictment was not the first in the Rail-Cycle case, and it may not be the last. On Oct. 1, 1998, the grand jury indicted Waste Management, the Rail-Cycle limited partnership and five Waste Management employees for alleged fraud, wire tapping, receiving and concealing stolen property, illegal use of trade secrets and other illegal acts. The company and employees have not entered pleas, but they deny wrong-doing and contend part of the indictment is not supported by grand jury testimony. A San Bernardino Sun columnist, Cassie MacDuff, recently suggested the whole conspiratorial plot may have been fabricated by a Rail-Cycle consultant who is looking for leniency in an unrelated drug case. According to the grand jury's indictment, Waste Management tried to destroy Cadiz Land Co., which was Rail-Cycle's largest opponent. Cadiz owns 1,700 acres of grape and citrus fields about two miles from the proposed landfill site and wants to sell underground water from the area to municipal and agricultural users. Cadiz feared the landfill would foul the groundwater. Waste Management operatives manipulated well readings by turning on pumps that were supposed to be inactive during a test period, according to the grand jury indictment. Waste Management executives then spread false rumors about reduction of the aquifer and Cadiz business practices in hopes to harming Cadiz's stock price, in addition to tapping Cadiz telephones, stealing a computer disk and forging signatures, according to prosecutors. A few criminal counts against the project proponents have been dismissed, but a trial remains a long way off, said Lough, the assistant district attorney. Two months after the Waste Management indictments, the grand jury indicted former Planning Commissioner Michael Dombrowski and his wife, Susan, for allegedly soliciting bribes, perjury, filing a false tax return and state income tax evasion. Michael Dombrowski was additionally charged with receiving bribes and grand theft. They have pleaded innocent. Although the charges against the Dombrowskis sprang from the Rail-Cycle investigation, the alleged wrongdoings are not related to Rail-Cycle, said Lough, the assistant district attorney. Mulvihill said the Dombrowskis' indictment is as surprising as Pilmer's. He described Michael Dombrowski as a "boy scout." "I know these people. They are just honest and upright," Mulvihill said. "(The investigation) can't stop with them. Obviously, there are people further along. If they did something wrong, it was because they were taking orders from above." Added Lough, "The grand jury is still active. Whether that is the end of problems for these people remains to be seen." Kottmeier said every planning department employee has already testified before the grand jury. "I'm astounded that the deputy DA's in this case would have been as mean and antagonistic to the employees of the planning department as they were," he said. The indictment has had "a devastating impact" on Pilmer, the planning director for more than 10 years and a San Bernardino County employee since the early 1970s, Kottmeier said. "Going through an experience like this really changes your perspective on whether you want to work for the county," he said. Contacts: Dennis Kottmeier, attorney, (909) 889-6100. Dr. Jim Mulvihill, California State University, San Bernardino planning professor, (909) 880-5522. Dan Lough, San Bernardino County assistant district attorney, (909) 387-6601. Leonard Garoupa, president, California County Planning Directors Association, (559) 675-7821