« Another One Bites The Dust | Main | For your holiday reading list »

December 12, 2006

Response to "Anonymous" at NW Republican

In response to my reports on what the Sizemore "victory" in October (which was upheld last week) really means, an anonymous former employee of Bill Sizemore's, someone who "worked for OTU and on Bill's race for governor," wrote comments at NW Republican claiming that I am confrontational, that I was the only person at OTU who felt things weren't right, that I only cooperated with union attorneys because I was afraid of being prosecuted myself, and that the union attorneys weren't interested in what anyone but me had to say about what happened at OTU. Being the "confrontational" person I am, and considering that someone decided to call attention to the post again over at Loaded Orygun, I have decided I can't simply let those comments sit out there unchallenged.

I know exactly who "Anonymous" is, but I will not name that person publicly. He and I never did hit it off, and I've always chalked it up to his being a chauvinist, not that it matters. What does matter is that what he is saying is false, and if I'm being "confrontational" by saying so, then so be it. Moreover, he knows it is false. He was concerned about Sizemore's behavior, too, and joined me one time in a sit-down meeting in Sizemore's office to confront him about it – and saw the Spinmeister in action himself. He was hurt and upset when we caught Sizemore lying to us. Sizemore's unethical behavior got so bad that this person actually quit over it, or so he told me (though he later surprised me by coming back to work for Sizemore).

"Anonymous" was no innocent babe himself. He asked me to dummy up documents needed to convince radio stations that Sizemore's gubernatorial commercials were true when they were not. He asked me to invent an editorial that could be mailed out to supporters and look like it was actually clipped from a newspaper. He personally raided OTU supplies and furnishings to be used on Sizemore's gubernatorial campaign. He was involved in finding ways to make PAC money work for Sizemore's campaign effort. He knew that one of Sizemore's campaign employees was being paid by the OTU Education Foundation, a 501(c)(3). All of these things originated with Sizemore, not with me. That he could testify in court against my character, as if I was solely responsible for anything that was wrong at OTU, and now write as if nothing untoward was ever committed by Sizemore does not surprise me. He has put his "team" ahead of principle, as he did when he later advised Sizemore to let me go because he knew of my deep concerns, and to live with himself for doing that he has "forgotten" what he used to know.

This person says the three former employees who were called to testify at the trial were not cross-examined by the union attorneys. Did they expect a fishing expedition? Did they want a "howdy-do"? They would not have provided any information voluntarily, and the unions could have no real way of knowing what they did or did not know, so why waste the Court's time with questions? I wish now that I had told the union attorneys what I believed each of the other employees knew, but I didn't see any need to drag others through the wringer I was being put through. I know for a fact that one person the unions interviewed knew information that could have been helpful to their case, but they would not volunteer it and the unions never asked the right questions.

"Anonymous" also seems bugged that no reporters interviewed him or the other two employees who testified to ask about their version of events. The thing is, the reporters weren't then, nor are they today, interested in what really happened. Whether it was laziness or something else, I do not know, but their reporting of what happened was never very detailed – in fact, it never even came close in detail to the earlier story about Sizemore's having conned his former fellow church members and others out of tons of money. That has been a bit of a surprise to me, actually. Before the trial I was kept awake at night fearing the possibility of TV cameras surrounding my house and nonstop coverage. Thankfully, that never happened and nobody cared nearly as much as I had feared they would. In fact, it was quite easy to avoid reporters and only a few tried to telephone me. If "Anonymous" wanted to tell his story, he could easily have issued a press release or letter to the editor. Being an egotistical person, however, he probably really wanted the press to come chasing after him, and since they did not, he has spent that last few years feeling slighted about having missed his opportunity to get those precious 15 minutes.

One paragraph of the anonymous post really stands out for me:

We testified that we were not aware of any wrongdoing by Bill, but, rather, that we all had had trouble with Becky Miller. Becky was confronted many times by staff about things she had done that were unethical and in violation of the law. She did the books and filed all the reports and Bill was, for the most part, unaware of all she was doing. He trusted her and saw her as someone with a lot of ability and promise.

This is Sizemore spin if I ever saw it – particularly the notion that he was taken in by me and had no idea I was doing anything wrong. That is simply not true. First, everyone at OTU was aware of Bill's wrongdoing and my angst over being forced to do more wrong to fix it. Most particularly, Kelli Highly was aware of it and, like me, was pulled into actively participating in it, but like me, she was not one of the three he called in his defense. Unlike "Anonymous" and the other two witnesses from OTU, I actually was cross-examined and it was no fun. But because I was telling the truth, Greg Byrne's questions only served to dig the hole deeper for Sizemore. It was almost surreal. I left the courtroom actually wondering whether Byrne was on the take from the unions.

Most definitely not a single person at OTU or on Bill's campaign ever once confronted me about things I had done that "were unethical and in violation of the law." I have tried to think of anything even close to that which could have been somehow blown out of proportion in this person's mind over the years, but I am not coming up with anything. I know that staff knew what I was doing and they also knew that I was unhappy about it and did it because either Sizemore asked me to do it or because his actions and decisions necessitated it (unless we were willing to accept the consequences of not doing it). None of the staff ever told me I should not be doing it or said they were disappointed in me or did anything close to confronting me about it so far as I can recall.

Those of us that worked with Becky saw things differently and warned Bill and even suggested he fire her. Bill was so wrapped up in the measures and talking to people that he paid little attention to the financial details and what he, I think at the time, considered office politics. We all believed that Becky agreed to testify against Bill because she was threatened with possible jail time, along with Bill, by union attorneys and the fact that Bill had denied Becky a raise in pay.

I don't doubt that "Anonymous" warned Sizemore that I was uncomfortable with his way of doing things and was near the cracking point – in other words, I could be dangerous – and that he should let me go – in fact, Sizemore told me who it was who told him that, which is part of why I know who "Anonymous" really is. And I don't doubt that Sizemore dismissed the warnings because he knew that "Anonymous" and I were not fond of each other – "office politics," as he would have thought.

The notion that Sizemore paid little attention to the financial details because he was so wrapped up in the cause is inaccurate, however. Sizemore kept entirely on top of the things that mattered in the big picture, and he knew and expected that I would make the details "work out" for him. He always approved tax filings before they were sent in – he instructed me as to how the forms should be filled out, he reviewed them and edited them, and he signed them before they were submitted. He reviewed all bills and instructed how much should be paid on each. He made decisions as to when to transfer money from one account to another, when to make contributions, when to solicit contributions, what we would do with contributions, and how we would report contributions.

What neither Sizemore nor the staff at OTU knew was that I had been desperately trying to find another job for a year and would have welcomed being fired, but nobody would hire me because I was so politically tainted. I wanted to leave while Sizemore was running for Governor, but didn't want to bring even more controversy to the campaign. After he lost, he took about a month off, so nobody was there for me to quit to. When he came back he had a fabulous idea for doing seven ballot measures at once, so I resolved to stay for the sake of the measures and try to keep things on the straight and narrow. I was able to do so for awhile, but eventually, when signature gathering ramped up, I realized it was hopeless and decided to leave. I could not even get an interview, something that had never happened to me in my life before. I finally asked for a raise – knowing full well the answer would be "no" – because I was under a ridiculous amount of pressure at home to ask for one and I had finally decided if I was going to be stuck in Hell then why not ask for more money. But the "no" had nothing to do with my leaving.

The timing on my leaving was due to a conversation I had with another prominent activist, one who was very good to me and for whom I have a great deal of gratitude, in which I told him that I felt like I was in prison and I was losing it because of what was going on at OTU. He advised me to leave right away rather than continue doing something that I felt so wrong about. I decided in his office that he was right and that I did have to leave, and the next day I gave my notice. Whether he advised me as a friend or as a politically astute person who saw a danger in my continued presence in Sizemore's operation, I do not know. I prefer to believe the former.

I think just about everyone who knew me knew I was on the edge at the time, spitting mad, terribly conflicted, emotionally exhausted, terrified, and seemingly unable to extricate myself from the situation. And Sizemore simply would not stop what he was doing, meaning I had to keep mopping up after him. I believed then and still believe that I was set up to take the blame for anything that we were caught doing, and Sizemore's insistence on ignorance of it all and his continued claims that I alone was responsible for the tax filings and the many other problems has only served to reinforce that belief.

Was I afraid of going to jail? Yes, absolutely. And yes, that did very much affect my decision to cooperate with the unions in their investigation. Over the months leading up to the trial, I acknowledged the extent of my own culpability, came to terms with it, and made things right with God. I then decided to make things right with Oregon. I literally did not know whether I would have immunity until the day before I testified, but after much soul-searching and, yes, prayer, I had decided to testify anyway because it was the right thing to do.

"Anonymous" says Sizemore "is not in this for the money," that he just wants people to see how the left "cleverly and sneakily" elect the "liberal candidates" that will "fund their liberal agenda." He "does not have a lot of money and we struggled to make payroll," he claims. Sizemore frequently had problems making payroll (though he always managed to work it out somehow). Once, when he was short of funds at both his radio station and OTU he convinced one donor to fund a radio advertising campaign about education. That person gave a large gift of money to the OTU Education Foundation for the advertising campaign, Sizemore instructed me to fudge the amounts spent on the ads so we could retain money for OTU payroll, and a good amount of the rest went to buy ads on his own radio station, thereby enabling him to pay the staff there. That was not unusual behavior for Sizemore, and that is something "Anonymous" ought to know.

More important, "Anonymous" knows very well that during several initiative campaigns we did not have money for payroll specifically because Sizemore was siphoning off hundreds of thousands of dollars through his petitioning company to pay for things for himself – a pool, appliances, additions to his home, etc. All the money raised would go from OTU straight to Bill's company, then Bill would hire someone else to actually do the work and pay that person only a portion of the money and keep the rest for himself. This was on top of his salary as Executive Director of OTU. Sometimes he had people give money directly, both on the books and off the books, to his company and, unbeknownst to them, keep all the money for himself. None of that money – which was in the hundreds of thousands – was ever reported to the state, either. And I doubt he ever paid taxes on it, though that is just my guess.

This is precisely why I do in fact believe Sizemore is in it for the money. Finding ways to scam people out of money has been his primary occupation for decades. Anonymous really ought to know this. He was there when The Oregonian revealed the truth about Sizemore and he was there when we all were insulted by Sizemore's lying to our faces and dancing around the story as we all tried to deal with its aftermath. "Anonymous" is being willfully ignorant.

And if I was so wrong about all this, there would be evidence of it. Instead, I would remind "Anonymous" that the evidence fully supported my story – a story the unions had pretty much already figured out all on their own before I ever spoke one word to them.

Finally, since the opportunity has presented itself, here is where you can find the latest updates on the Sizemore lawsuit. Republicans will tell you to consider the source. Being that most of my readers are Democrats, I doubt you'll have any trouble with that source being the OEA.

Posted by Becky at December 12, 2006 12:08 PM