Michael Heider served as the lead investigator for both Case 44—a whistleblower report alleging a $6 million bribery and kickback scheme—and the retaliatory investigation against City Auditor Brad Neumann. By investigating both the underlying whistleblower disclosure and the retaliation complaint that followed, Heider acted as a self-interested investigator, creating an inherent conflict of interest.
His report on Case 44 was deeply flawed—it contained no exhibits, no documentation, and no supporting evidence. Despite the severity of the allegations, Heider did not conduct a competent or transparent investigation. Allegations #2 and #3 against Brad Neumann falsely stated that the Ontario Police Department (OPD) had investigated Case 44, when in fact, Heider knew that OPD had conducted no such investigation. There is no evidence that Heider ever contacted OPD regarding Case 44, raising serious concerns about the integrity and intent of his investigative work.
This flawed report became the foundation for the City’s retaliatory actions. Rather than investigate the substance of the whistleblower report or protect the whistleblower, Heider’s actions served to discredit and remove the individual who attempted to ensure compliance with audit standards.