Ferguson Inquiry Supplies Recall Ammunition

The completion last week of a district attorney’s probe into allegations of political corruption by Moorpark City Councilman Thomas C. (Bud) Ferguson has yet to end the controversy surrounding the man whose moral conduct was described by investigators as “out of step with 20th-Century California politics.”

Although no charges were brought, Ferguson’s supporters and political opponents alike agree that the results of the investigation will probably be used against him in a recall campaign, which was launched shortly after the accusations surfaced.

But the success of the recall effort will depend in large on the reaction of voters to charges made by the district attorney’s office that the 68-year-old former machine shop owner and business consultant is a “politician from a different era” who routinely engaged in “back-room deals” and political back-scratching, officials said.

Ferguson’s political support has come from a broad base of development and business interests, senior citizens and rank-and-file voters whom Ferguson has assisted in various ways, including loans and fund raising, City Council colleagues said.

“People come to me and say that, ‘no matter what, Bud did this for me,’ and they talk about the gifts he has given with no expectations in return,” City Councilman Clint Harper said. “He sees himself as this homespun leader who deals behind the scenes to do what has to get done.”

The Ventura County district attorney’s office concluded after a six-month investigation that there was not enough evidence to charge Ferguson with bribery or other crimes. Evidence gathered in the probe showed, however, that Ferguson lied repeatedly under oath to investigators regarding his dealings with former Councilman Danny Woolard, the report said.

Woolard, who is serving a six-month prison sentence for stealing $5,500 from the Moorpark Post Office, where he worked, alleged that Ferguson arranged a $2,000 bribe and lent him $20,000 to $30,000 over the past two years to influence his votes on the five-member council.

Woolard also alleged that Ferguson arranged a $7,500 loan last September to help Woolard cover up the post-office thefts. Woolard resigned from the City Council on Jan. 13, the day after he pleaded guilty in federal court to the embezzlement charge.

District attorney’s investigators concluded that Ferguson probably did arrange at least $10,000 in loans to Woolard to exert some influence over his council colleague. But investigators said there was little proof that the monies were tied to any particular council vote, a requirement for bribery charges.

The investigation reported that Ferguson lied to investigators about the loans, a charge supported by a tape recording that Woolard secretly made of a conversation the two men held in January at Ferguson’s house. Ferguson, on the tape, acknowledged knowing about a $2,000 payment to Woolard and talked about how he attempted to help Woolard conceal the post-office thefts from authorities, according to a partial transcript of the tape that was included in the district attorney’s report.

Senior Deputy Dist. Atty. Thomas J. Hutchins, who headed the investigation, said charges against Ferguson were not filed largely because the only evidence at a trial would be testimony by Woolard. He said Woolard would not have been a credible witness because of his embezzlement conviction and admitted cocaine addiction.

Woolard’s Views

Woolard said in a telephone interview from prison that the investigation showed that he was telling the truth all along.

“It says that he’s guilty but they’re not going to indict him,” Woolard said. “If the people of Moorpark don’t get rid of him, then they deserve him.”

The day after the report was released, Ferguson said he was not surprised that no charges were filed against him. “I knew all along that I didn’t commit any kind of crime,” he said.

But Ferguson denied lying to investigators. He said that, if the district attorney’s office has proof of his engaging in “back-room deals,” he “would like to know when they happened, who they were with and what they were about.”

Ferguson said he is disappointed that some of his former supporters lost faith in him during the investigation. “People forget the good things, and they only remember the bad,” he said.

During last week’s City Council meeting, Ferguson repeated his vow not to resign unless he is recalled. He was first elected in 1984.

Former and present council members, who agree with the district attorney’s office’s description of Ferguson as an old-style politician, say he has always been more comfortable negotiating on behalf of the city in private. His strength, said council colleagues, is his ability to find a compromise in private discussions on divisive issues.

‘Behind the Scenes’

“He is uncomfortable in the public forum and more comfortable doing things behind the scenes,” said former City Councilman James Hartley. “But I think that some people in the community believe that it won’t be the end of the world if he stays in office until 1988.”

Recall organizer Patti Smith said she believes that she will have no trouble collecting the 1,840 signatures of registered Moorpark voters by July 8, the deadline to qualify a recall measure for next November’s ballot.

She said that, although she is disappointed that the district attorney’s investigation did not yield any criminal charges against Ferguson, “They did verify that he was lying. At least the report agrees that he is not trustworthy to represent our city.”

One of Ferguson’s most vocal supporters, resident Robert A. Felburg, wrote letters to local newspapers and spoke at City Council meetings throughout the district attorney’s investigation, which lasted six months.

“I don’t doubt that he has told an occasional white lie or has engaged in some back-room politicking, but he has always done it to help the city of Moorpark, or to help an individual,” Felburg said after the report was released.

Will be Used by Enemies

City Councilwoman Eloise Brown, a political ally of Ferguson, said the district attorney’s report of the investigation will be used mostly by Ferguson’s political enemies. But, she said, she doubts that it will hinder Ferguson’s ability to be an effective councilman.

“We will accept the results of the report and move forward,” Brown said. “The determination of the district attorney’s office is that there are no criminal charges being filed, and I would think it would be reasonable to just accept that.”

City Councilman John Galloway predicted that the results of the investigation will have little effect on the way Ferguson conducts city business.

Galloway, criticizing the district attorney’s decision not to bring charges, said Ferguson “won’t change, because he has been given the right to continue operating the way he does.”