"Just a lonely worker in the vineyard": the man who ran OC, part 1

From the "Trustee Tom Fuentes files" [Fuentes got his start working for corrupt OC supervisor Caspers; Caspers' chief crony was the corrupt Harber]:

Just a lonely worker in the vineyard: 

the man who ran OC, part 1

Harber Day

Fred Harber

     It’s a gray June morning at the Orange County courthouse in downtown Santa Ana, 1972. In case you don’t know, Orange County has been an intermittent hotspot of political corruption, and 1972 was (as it turns out) a banner year in that regard, owing in no small part to “Dick and Doc,” a corrupt political enterprise operating mostly in the shadows—until, like a vampire, it was brought into the searing light. Its key players: Richard “Dick” O’Neill, a wealthy OC landowner; Louis “Doc” Cella, a successful doctor/businessman; and Fred Harber, an ordinary-seeming but potent political Svengali who made his living managing properties.
     Cella called Harber a “genius,” and maybe he was. 
     The “Dick and Doc” operation controlled—er, supported—several of the county’s Supervisors, including Democrat Robert Battin, Republican Ronald Caspers, and Democrat Ralph Clark, each of whom owed much to Harber for their successful campaigns. Those three were the “board majority,” and they had pushed through various shared initiatives.
     Recently (relative to that gray morning in 1972), Battin had fired two of his aides: Steve Polatnick and John Abbott, both 27 years old. As the Times (6-20-72) explained, they were there to reveal what was really going on behind the scenes:

     Both were fired last week as an aftermath of the June primary election in which Battin finished second…. The two candidates will vie in a runoff in the November general election. 

     At the time of the dismissals, Battin claimed his two aides were “ivory tower types,” adding that he was looking for assistants who are more community-minded. 

     But Polatnick and Abbott denied that statement Monday, contending it was the supervisor who was in the “ivory tower.” 

     “We handled hundreds of….calls and problems…while Battin sat in his inner office with orders that no constituents be allowed to speak to him…or see him. 

     “An exception was always made, of course, for big-money contributors,” Polatnick said. 

     Both claimed they have been fired on Harber’s orders because they opposed his idea that they should spend full time working on Battin’s campaign from now until November.

    —None of that was remarkable. But here’s what they said next:

     …they alleged that Harber pulled the strings in Battin’s office, had masterminded a move to obtain a list of county employes for a last-minute campaign letter, had been behind a school busing “smear” letter aimed at [Battin’s opponent] Wenke and claimed that the one-time Cypress city manager and Buena Park councilman also controls two other supervisors, Board Chairman Ronald Caspers and Ralph Clark. 

     “He’s working to get a fourth vote on the board right now,” Polatnick added, implying that Harber was supporting Ralph Diedrich, who is bidding to oust incumbent Supervisor William Phillips in the 3rd District. 

     “He can control the board if he wishes, Polatnick commented. “It is my impression that Harber sees himself as the most powerful man in Orange County—a real kingmaker.”

Harber

     —Wow. For close observers of county politics in those days, the notion that Fred Harber, who held no office, was a power behind the scenes of the Board of Supervisors was old news. But THE power?
     (Polatnick and Abbott made a point of saying that Harber wasn’t motivated by profit. [They were partly wrong about that.] No, he was playing “the game of political power,” they said.)
     One or some of the news people then made phone calls, and thus it was that, a few hours later, Harber showed up at the courthouse, presenting himself to reporters:

     …Harber appeared … dressed in slacks, sports shirt and cowboy boots to categorically deny the allegations…. 

     Harber … emphatically denied that he sees himself as a kingmaker, or that he controls the Board of Supervisors. 

     “Bob Battin has a respect for my advice and counsel,” he admitted, “and many times he will follow that advice, but not always.”…. 

     Harber admitted that he had worked on Clark’s campaign as an adviser, but said he had not attempted to influence the supervisor since that time…. 

     Asked about any connection with Diedrich’s campaign, Harber replied that he had talked to him before the race [that year] began, but said he had no close connections since that time…. 

     Told the [two fired] aides had charged him with ordering Battin to keep his mouth shut, Harber replied, “That’s not true. I only advised him not to lose his temper and to be careful to explain what he was saying. As his campaign manager, that’s my job….” 

     “I’m really just a lonely worker in the vineyard,” he added, over the chuckles of his audience. “I just strive to help my friends bring better government to Orange County.” (“Battin a puppet, ex-aides claim; he denies it,” LA Times, 6-20-72)

     Within a few years, Supervisors Battin and Diedrich would serve jail time. So would “Doc” Cella.
     Within two years, Supervisor Caspers and Svengali Harber would be dead (or at least missing).
     But I’m getting ahead of myself. 

Cypress police department, 1961

Just who was this Fred Harber fella?

     Fred Harber (b. 1919) served as an officer in the Navy during the war. Afterward, he became a lawyer, practicing in his native Oklahoma while managing political campaigns.
     By 1954, Harber had moved his family to burgeoning Southern California, in the vicinity of Buena Park/Cypress (northwest OC), where he owned a gas station. Soon, he owned a shopping center and an apartment development. He was good with money.
     While managing his properties, the pro-development Harber entered politics, first as Buena Park planning commissioner; then as member of the city council; then as mayor (1959).
     He embraced controversies, including one over an allegedly incompetent city administrator named Storm. Harber wanted Storm fired.

Job Denni

     Harber was no respecter of norms, it seems. Remarkably, he pursued a recall of the council members who defended Storm. And, in general, he was willing to introduce partisan politics into what had been a long-established non-partisan status quo throughout California, attracting the disapproval of both parties, including his own (the Democratic party).
     By 1960, he and his Buena Park council colleague Dennis Murphy were viewed, at least by some, as operating a “political machine,” one tied to efforts at commercial and industrial development; one, perhaps, willing to make deals.
     During that year, while mayor, he also served as Cypress’ acting city manager. 

     During the April ’60 election, he was caught by local anti-incumbent fever and lost the Buena Park mayoralty. At the same time, dairyman Job Denni was newly elected to the Cypress city council.
     Denni and Harber would soon participate in some dark shenanigans, or so it is alleged. More on that in a moment.
     In Cypress, Denni sided with a faction that sought a “use variance” for a large residential subdivision in a city dominated by agriculture—dairy farms and chicken ranches—and, as city manager, Harber was involved in that along with an attempt to recall members of the Cypress city council. (At the time, agricultural towns such as Cypress/Cerritos/LaPalma sought to “keep people out and cows in.” They fought development so their towns wouldn’t end up like Los Angeles.)
     By then, that area of northwestern OC had a reputation for endless political turmoil. 

* * *

     Harber maintained his ties to the Democratic party and, in 1961, he was among 26 county Democrats serving on the state party Central Committee. Five among this group were delegates that drafted the party platform, including William Dannemeyer—later, a notorious gay-bashing Republican—and Richard Hanna, another conservative Democrat. Delegates named appointees to the committee, and Dannemeyer’s appointees included Fred Harber and Jerry Zanelli. (Zanelli at some point married the woman who became, in 1996, the notorious political consultant for the SOCCCD faculty union [Pam Zanelli] who recommended exploiting Republican homophobia!)
     Harber and Dannemeyer remained allies, it seems. According to the Times, the latter again appointed Harber to the central committee in 1964.
     Also in 1964, Harber was appointed to Democrat Pierre Salinger’s campaign “executive committee” in the latter’s failed bid for California senator. Dr. Louis Cella—I mentioned him earlier—served as campaign treasurer.
     In 1968, Harber was chairman of the Democratic State Central Committee for the 34th Congressional District.
     As we’ll see, Harber seemed more comfortable operating, politically, behind the scenes, both with city government and county government. In that role, his importance grew, though it was not always serving the Democratic party or its candidates.

Ronald Caspers

     Let’s focus now on a new player on the OC political scene starting in 1970: Ronald Caspers (b. 1927), owner of a Westminster savings and loan. He had gained minor infamy in 1955 when, owing to his and the other pilot's error, his yacht and a Navy ship collided, killing two, including Caspers’ wife.
     In 1970, Caspers, a Republican, declared that he would challenge Supervisor—and fellow Republican—Alton E. Allen, in the June primary. Anaheim mayor Ralph Clark also indicated an interest in running for Supervisor in another OC district. Meanwhile, somewhat mysteriously, Allen became the subject of a recall effort, fueled by inexplicable charges of Allen wrongdoing, which Caspers joined. (Was Caspers behind it? Indeed he was.)
     Caspers’ campaign “statement of qualification” included dubious attacks on Allen, which were deleted by the registrar, an action Caspers sought legally to challenge.
     In May, the Times reported that Caspers contributed $27,000 to his own campaign. He indicated that he was willing to spend as much as $75,000 of his own money to win in the primary—for an office that paid $15,000 a year.
     By June, the Times reported that “Caspers has flooded the 5th district…with letters, brochures, telephone note pads and even car window flags for Memorial Day.” He had the help of the ruthless and innovative (computer letter mailing) team of Butcher and Forde. A young Tom Fuentes, finishing up at Chapman College, was his campaign manager.
     Also by June, “snap tallies” showed that Caspers had gained a considerable lead over Allen. In the end, Caspers crushed Allen, having waged what the Times called “a costly and sometimes bitter campaign.” A lot of the bitterness stemmed from Caspers’ negative and misleading campaign literature, crafted by Butcher and Forde, the guys with those newfangled computer-generated mailing lists. (R. Scott Moxley: "Arnold Forde, [Irvine Mayor Larry] Agran's top political consultant, pocketed $120,000 per month in taxpayer funds for more than half a decade to do public relations for a local public park that still has not been completed.") 
     In July, the Times reported that “Caspers spent $81,695” to run his campaign. “Caspers’ expenditures—more than half self-contributed—were four times larger than the highest amount previously spent in a supervisorial campaign…. On the expense side, Casper [sic] reported spending $43,184 for literature and postage, $5,000 to Opinion Research for a poll, $7,584 for petty cash, and $5,980 in gravel expenses for 120 precinct workers.”
     That November, Ralph Clark handily won his Supervisorial contest. According to the Times, he spent $40,000 defeating his Republican opponent—again, for a position that paid $15,000 per year (soon bumped up to a whopping $17,500).
     Post election, Caspers and Co. got to work: the Times reported that, “Since winning, [Caspers] and his chief aide, Tom Fuentes [the guy who later darkened the SOCCCD Board of Trustees, 2000-2012] have attended several board meetings in an effort to get a feel for the duties of a supervisor, have met with every city council in the 5th District and have talked to most of the county department heads.”
     In early 1971, the Times reported that, in preparation for his new duties, Caspers resigned as president of his Savings and Loan and had taken on the “less time-consuming job” of “chairman of the board.” Caspers appointed his chief campaign aide, Tom Fuentes, 22, as his executive aide.
     In January of ’71, Clark and Caspers were sworn into office and that created a new voting bloc: Battin, Caspers, and Clark, the board majority. They ruthlessly pursued their new vision, one that had not yet been articulated. According to the Long Beach Independent (Jan 6, 1971),

Robert Battin

     Robert W. Battin…was chosen chairman of the … Board…, as two new supervisors joined him to form a bloc… 

     In short order, the board: 

     —Refused to reappoint department heads except on a “month by month” basis for six months, then agreed that appointments would be on a yearly basis thereafter; 

     —Decided to scrap all commissions, committees, board and study groups, not mandated by law, “unless they can justify themselves”; 

     —Removed Supervisor William J. Phillips of Fullerton from membership on the Local Agency Formation Commission, of which he was chairman, and 

     — Approved nominations by Caspers and Clark to four commissions mandated by law, and also approved their selection of administrative aides [including Thomas Fuentes, age 22, Caspers’ campaign manager]. 

     The board’s decision not to reappoint department heads for full terms came as a distinct surprise; all were present in the board’s meeting room at Santa Ana to welcome the new supervisors. 

     Battin, Caspers and Clark voted as a bloc most of the day.

     As a newly-minted OC Supervisor, Caspers appointed his campaign advisor, Arnold Forde, as member of the OC Planning Commission.
     Despite their ruthlessness, the Battin-Caspers-Clark bloc soon experienced setbacks to their agenda, the key element of which was firing the county’s administrative officer, Robert Thomas. A “source close to the board” [Harber?] explained the situation to the Times (Feb 14, 1971):

     The story of the past two weeks in county government and the motives behind the various supervisors’ actions, as pieced together by this well-placed source, is fascinating. 

     As he described it in an interview, this is how then new board majority, Battin, Caspers and Ralph Clark, fell out—at least temporarily—and met their first significant setbacks: 

     Even before taking office, the majority saw themselves as bringing in a new philosophy of government (Clark and Caspers just took office, and Battin is a holdover). 

     The old board, they felt, represented essentially a city council approach to county government. They had not shown a strong desire to become involved in administrative duties and had left these to their [somewhat celebrated] administrative officer, [Robert] Thomas. 

     Under the circumstances, [Thomas] had done his job well. But this wasn’t the new board’s style. They felt there were many things going wrong in the county, particularly with the development of the area’s remaining open space and the southern part of the county. 

New Philosophy

Caspers

     They wanted to bring in a new philosophy on growth, a new, more environmentally responsible [i.e., "developer-friendly"] way of doing things at the county level. 

     Since policy was changing at the supervisorial level, they felt they needed someone in the administrative office with whom they could work. More control at the supervisorial level meant it was going to be a strong board and weak administrator. 

     For various reasons, the movement to drop Thomas was at the outset unanimous [among members of the board]. The supervisors from the former board shared a common complaint concerning Thomas in that they thought he had handled the recent flap over their pay raise badly. [Battin had led an unpopular effort to more than double supervisors’ pay.] As an appointed official, he should have shouldered more of the blame, they felt. 

     The man that Battin and Caspers settled on to replace Thomas was Jack P. Vallerga [who, natch, was sent to jail in 1977], chief deputy assessor under Andrew Hinshaw [who served prison time for bribery, 1976]. [The other name that had been under consideration was none other than Fred Harber.] Vallerga, they felt, had proved himself to be an efficient, self-effacing and even brilliant number two man under Hinshaw. 

     Supervisor William Phillips, who with David Baker is a veteran Supervisor, was consulted about Vallerga and agree to back him. 

     The majority, with Phillips’ approval, picked Feb. 2 to remove Thomas. They later found that Baker, who in the meantime had switched his position on the Thomas firing, would be out of town that day. 

     But the majority decided to proceed anyway. “For votes represents a majority of the people,” was the rationale. 

     But when Phillips learned that Baker would be out of town, he decided to pull out of the oust-Thomas movement, saying that he wouldn’t go along with it at that time and preferred to see it done another way. 

Life of Its Own

     By that time, the ouster had taken on a life of its own. Both Clark and Caspers had conferred with Thomas and told him that since the new board was going to do things a lot differently, he would no longer be comfortable in his position. 

     Thomas, furious, told them he would fight any attempt to remove him from office. 

     Meantime, the morning of Feb 2 arrived, the supervisors’ regular Tuesday meeting, and it was discovered at the last minute that the public explanation for Thomas’ removal had not been thought through…. 

     They had taken office without first enunciating a philosophy of government…. 

Session a Debacle

     As a result, that Tuesday session was something of a debacle. Clark ended up abstaining from voting on Battin’s motion to remove Thomas on the grounds that Baker was not present and that the issue should be deferred until his return from Washington, D.C. 

     The following Tuesday, Feb 9, the board voted, 4-1, with Battin the sole nay vote, to refer the Thomas issue to a three-man committee (Phillips, Caspers and Baker) for study between now and budget time in July. 

     “It was all a mistake,” said the source [Harber?], “but it won’t happen again.”

    After these (and other) screw-ups, the board majority decided on a new approach, a “go-slow approach” that would “place more emphasis on method.” Accordingly, the majority’s goals and reasons for its actions would be better thought out and better articulated. 

     Also in February, the Times reported that a “new group of political confidants and advisers [had] materialized around the Board of Supervisors offices….” In the past, said the Times, “these ‘inside’ advisers [had] been relatively circumspect in their visits to board offices…. But the new advisers not only check in regularly at the offices but also make frequent appearances with their supervisors at other functions.“ 

     According to the Times, “Three men make up the core of the group”: Fred Harber, Dr. Louis J Cella, and Arnold Forde. Harber and Cella had had Battin’s ear since his election in 1968. Starting in 1971, Harber and Cella—and now Forde—became regular and visible visitors. Forde, said the Times, “appears to spend most of his time…in Caspers’ office.”
     Harber helped manage Battin’s earlier campaign and then served as Battin’s aide. Said the Times, the savvy Harber often accompanied Battin to meetings.
     Cella had “considerable property holdings throughout the county and is a heavy contributor to Democratic political campaigns,” including Battin and Clark’s. “The physician-businessman is an almost daily visitor to Battin’s office” and also accompanies him at meetings.
     OK. By early 1970, Harber, along with Cella and Forde, was among three key advisors to at least some OC Supervisors, including Battin, Caspers, and likely Clark.

The Job Denni story

     Let’s return to Mr. Job Denni, last mentioned as a newly-elected Cypress city councilman (in 1960). I’ve sought newspaper clippings about Denni. Here’s what I’ve found:
     Denni’s name first pops up in 1960, when he is described as a “prominent dairyman” in the then-agricultural town of Cypress. (His father, also Job Denni, also a dairyman, settled in the area decades earlier.)
     In April of 1960, Cypress city councilmen clashed over “recent issue of a use variance concerning a 400-acre subdivision” (for a large residential tract). No doubt this was a clash between the pro-agriculture traditionalists and the pro-development newcomers.
     “Dairymen,” the Times reported, “[had] obtained a ‘stay order’ against this issuance, and the matter is now before Superior Court in Santa Ana.” Two of the three councilmen who wanted the use variance (Denni, despite being a dairyman, was the third) became the target of a recall. Denni, because he had just been elected, was not yet vulnerable to a recall—saved by a technicality.
     Then, in October, the court ruled in favor of the use variance “for the 1,600-home tract.” That muddied the status of the recall movement—set off by the three councilmen’s support of the variance—which was still gathering signatures for the recall petition. According to the Times, “Fred Harber, acting city administrator, said he is required by law to proceed immediately with a report to the council on the sufficiency of signatures on the recall petitions.” But that was complicated by “heavy last-minute registration for the upcoming Presidential election,” namely, the Nixon/Kennedy contest. Evidently, the variance became an issue for citizens because ”various councilmen had said earlier that no large subdivisions should be approved prior to development of a master plan of land use.” About half of the city’s land was zoned for agriculture, but the variance would change that. 

* * *

     A year later, a bombshell: according to the Ventura County Star Free Press (10-11-61), “Job Denni, Cypress city councilman, and John J. Zitny, Buena Park lawyer, have been arrested in connection with an alleged land zone payoff scheme.
     “Denni was booked yesterday on charges of bribery, conspiracy to receive bribery and soliciting another to enter into a bribery situation and Zitny was booked on related charges.
     “Dist. Atty. Kenneth Williams said the alleged payoff last year involved $12,000 and a change from agricultural to residential property in the city of Cypress.”
     The next day, the Times had the story: 

     Investigations into purported bribery cases in West Orange County will continue following the arrest Tuesday of a Cypress city councilman and a Buena Park attorney, the district attorney’s office reports. 

     DeWitte Chatterton, chief trial deputy, said investigators for the District Attorney’s office are continuing their work in an effort to see if persons in any other cities might be involved in the bribery scandals. 

     The latest suspects to be arrested by the DA and State Attorney General’s offices were Job J. Denni, Jr., 35, Cypress city councilman since April 1960, and John J. Zitny, 31, Buena Park attorney.

$12,000 Bribe

     The two are accused of accepting a $12,000 bribe from a real estate developer in an effort to get a rezoning project through the Cypress City Council. 

     Chatterton charged the pair also were involved in two other attempts seeking bribes from real estate developers or brokers for land rezoning or use variances. Both of those attempts were rejected by the persons involved, he said. 

Appearance Date

     Chatteron said the pair, now free on $9,975 bail, probably will go before the grand jury next week for possible indictment. At present, they are scheduled to appear Oct. 20 in Anaheim-Fullerton Municipal Court on the bribery charges. 

     According to Chatterton, Zitny, last year’s chairman of the Buena Park March of Dimes and a former Buena Park planning commissioner, acted as the go-between in the bribe cases. 

     However, Zitny denied the accusation upon his release from jail Tuesday evening. He said the $12,000 was his legal fee for representing the broker before the city planning commission and council. 

     The arrest came only a few days after the last of six Westminster officials had entered pleas in another bribe case.

Cypress in the 1920s

     In December (1961), Denni and Zitny lost an appeal to quash the grand jury indictment. The two entered innocent pleas to the accusations. Trial was set for March, 1962. 

     Their trial ultimately started in May (of 1962). 

     According to the Long Beach Independent, Denni, testifying on his own behalf, asserted that he owns “$1 million worth of property in Cypress.” 

     “Deputy Dist. Atty. DeWitte Chatterton, on cross examination, was frustrated in attempts to question Denni on the source of the defendant’s income. Judge Karl L Davis sustained Jacob’s repeated objections to the line of questioning. 

     Testifying on a business deal with Daniel Cohn and Cohn’s attorney, Robert Light, both of whom are prosecution witnesses, Denni accused Cohn of “welching” on the purchase of 15 acres of Denni’s property. He said that all meetings with Cohn and Light pertained to the purchase, and that he never solicited a bribe from them.

     This next part is surprising, at least to me: according to the Times (6-14-62),

     Cypress City Councilman Job Denni and Buena Park and attorney John J. Zitny Wednesday were acquitted of charges of bribery and conspiracy in the windup of a five-wee Superior Court trial here. 

     The jury of eight women and four men acquitted Denni of 14 counts of soliciting, offering to receive a bribe and conspiracy. 

. . . 

     The charges were based on three separate land zoning transactions involving the subdivision of agricultural land in Cypress. 

. . .

     Denni, who was elected to the Cypress City Council in 1960 on a platform of “planned development,” has continued to serve as a councilman since his arrest.

     A month later, the Times (7-8-62) reported that “Job Denni, recently cleared by a Superior Court jury of bribery charges, Monday resigned from the Cypress City Council.”

Denni dies: plain crash

     But things end very badly for Denni. Evidently he moved up to a little town on the western slope of the Sierra Nevada. Four years after his acquittal (10-31-66), the Times reported that

     Job J. Denni, 40, Strathmore area rancher and businessman, was killed Saturday night when the light plane he was piloting crashed near here. Denni’s 15-year-old son, Job Jr., was seriously injured in the crash and was reported in critical condition in a Lindsay hospital. [Strathmore and Lindsay are small towns on the western slope of the California Sierra Nevada, roughly between Fresno and Bakersfield.]

     A year or so later, the Tulare Advance Register (1-5-68) reported that

     The late Job Denni, [of] Lindsay, left an estate valued at $1 million. The value was revealed in inventory and appraisement papers filed this week in Tulare County Superior Court. Full value was placed at $1,354,817.

One more twist: 

     Evidently, this is not the full story. There is good reason to believe that, at the end of his trial in 1962, Denni was not yet finished with his legal problems stemming from the 1961 bribery imputations. Further, though Mr. Harber’s name never comes up (at least in the reports that I could find about this case), he, too, was in legal jeopardy regarding accusations of bribery and shakedowns in Cypress.

     We must turn to an article that appeared in the OC Register in 1978. It reports Harber’s attempted shakedowns in 1974 but it refers also to Harber’s involvement in the 1961 shakedowns….

End of PART ONE

SEE PART TWO

Related reading: 

• The ‘Darth Vaders of Direct Mail’ [Butcher and Forde], LA Times, March 3, 1996 
• The Shooting Star Mystery, Dissent the Blog 
• 'Dick and Doc's' political empire, California Journal, January 1976  
• Battin a puppet, ex-aides claim; he denies it, LA Times, June 20, 1972
• Politics: the sinking of a political machine, Orange Coast Magazine, June 1984