Michael Heider served as the lead investigator for both Case 44—a whistleblower report alleging a multimillion-dollar bribery and kickback scheme—and the City of Ontario’s subsequent retaliatory investigation that led to the termination of City Auditor Brad Neumann.
Under California law, retaliation occurs when an employer takes adverse action against an employee for engaging in protected activity. The City Auditor had notified executive leaders that he was being ordered to violate professional auditing standards—activity protected under California Labor Code § 1102.5, which prohibits retaliation against employees who disclose violations of law, regulations, or professional standards.
By overseeing both the investigation into Case 44 and the later probe that led directly to the City Auditor’s removal, Mr. Heider placed himself in a clear conflict of interest. In California, a conflict of interest exists when an official’s prior involvement, actions, or interests compromise—or reasonably appear to compromise—impartial judgment in a related matter.
Mr. Heider’s investigative actions and omissions in Case 44 directly informed Allegations #2 and #3 in the City’s subsequent disciplinary case against Mr. Neumann. Those allegations were premised on the false assertion that the Ontario Police Department was actively investigating Case 44. That claim is factually unsupported: no such police investigation or report ever existed, according to both the City of Ontario’s Public Records Department and the Ontario Police Department’s Public Records Department. Moreover, according to Exhibit 16 of Mr. Heider’s own investigative file, his time-stamped communication with the City Auditor on December 12, 2023 described Case 44 as being “in preliminary review,” not under investigation by OPD.
By incorporating the unfounded assertion of an OPD investigation into his findings, Mr. Heider became a principal architect of the very claim his later investigation was supposed to evaluate—undermining both the appearance and the reality of impartiality.
At the same time, Mr. Heider’s actions and inactions regarding Case 44, and his failure to communicate accurately with the City Auditor, occurred while the Auditor was making repeated protected disclosures. The City Auditor informed executive leadership on multiple occasions that he had been ordered to act in violation of professional standards. Informing relevant authorities of an order to violate California law or City policy constitutes protected activity under § 1102.5. Instead of being supported for these good-faith disclosures, the City Auditor’s concerns were used as justification for his termination—an apparent violation of California’s whistleblower-protection laws.
In this context, the flawed investigation of Case 44 conducted by Mr. Heider became a central component of the City of Ontario’s rationale for removing its City Auditor—an action that, when viewed against the documented timeline of events, appears retaliatory in both purpose and effect.
Public-Interest Notice:
This publication concerns the performance and accountability of public officials, the integrity of municipal investigations, and the enforcement of whistleblower protections under California Labor Code § 1102.5. These subjects constitute matters of substantial public interest because they relate to the expenditure of public funds, the independence of government oversight functions, and the City of Ontario’s compliance with professional and statutory standards.
Anti-SLAPP Compliance (CCP § 425.16):
Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure § 425.16, this communication is an act in furtherance of the constitutional rights of petition and free speech in connection with a public issue. It presents truthful information and opinion based on disclosed facts, supported by official public records and exhibits, and is therefore protected expression under California’s anti-SLAPP statute.
Corrections & Clarifications
If you have concerns or believe that any information presented on this page is inaccurate or misrepresents a fact, please contact me directly at AuditorNeumann@gmail.com.
Please reference the specific statement or section in question so that I can review the matter promptly and ensure the accuracy and integrity of all published information.