All candidates well-funded in San Bernardino County judicial challenge races

Special interest money has touched elections for two San Bernardino County judgeships and all four candidates are flush with cash as a result.

In challenging San Bernardino County Judge Stanford E. Reichert for his job, Deputy District Attorney David Tulcan said the judge was "erratic" and that his overturned decisions have "wasted expenses to taxpayers."

Tulcan said, "There is a contingent of the population that is very unhappy with the way he has conducted himself on the bench." He didn't get specific.

According to state campaign finance records, Tulcan's challenge has been bankrolled primarily by a Political Action Committee and prominent Southern California real estate developer Jimmy Previti, who through his various companies and associates has donated about $182,000 to Tulcan's bid to oust Reichert.

It also turns out Previti had a case before Reichert in which the judge said he made a ruling the developer did not like.

Previti's business has also donated to a PAC that is funding Tulcan called Business Leaders for Ethical Government. That PAC has contributed $132,000 to defeat Reichert and was started by former assistant assessor James Erwin and Mark Kirk, a former supervisor's chief of staff. Both were among the defendants in the Colonies LP alleged corruption case who were acquitted or had the charges dropped after seven years.

The same PAC previously backed the campaign that defeated the 2018 reelection campaign of San Bernardino County District Attorney Mike Ramos, who prosecuted the Colonies case, which ended with no convictions and resulted in wrongful prosecution lawsuits against the county.

Previti supported the campaign against Ramos as well, and he has donated to the challenger in the other judge race.

"It came as a surprise. My opponent is being financed by a disgruntled litigant with very deep pockets. In a guardianship case, I made a legally correct ruling against the litigant that he did not like," Reichert wrote in an email.

Reichert said Previti sought temporary custody for a family member, but he could not grant it because neither the family member nor the family member's parents had any contact with San Bernardino County.

"There was no jurisdiction to grant the temporary guardianship. Jimmy dismissed the case before the first hearing on the permanent guardianship," said Reichert.

Reichert, on the bench for almost 15 years, said the attacks by Tulcan have been unfounded.

"I have never been characterized by attorneys or my colleagues as 'erratic.' My opponent has never given any specifics as to any of his attacks on my character or my performance as a trial judge," said the judge.

The judge said he has overseen traffic cases, serious felonies, as well as small claims and complex civil cases.

"In my court, politics has never, and never will, affect any of my decisions. My decisions are based strictly on the facts and the law and nothing else," said the judge. "The independence of a judge to make a decision strictly on the facts and the law is being challenged in my reelection."

Previti did not return messages from the Daily Journal.

A prosecutor for 14 years, Tulcan told the Daily Journal upon declaring his candidacy that he's concerned about issues of public safety. He said, "People were upset with how [Reichert] treated attorneys" and that the judge was "eccentric," without elaborating.

A short campaign video on his website says, "As a criminal prosecutor, I've seen justice being denied in our courtroom for far too long. We need judges that are going to support public safety by following the law and maintaining fairness in the courtroom."

Reichert is also being supported by special interest money, having received $20,000 from Judicial Excellence Together, the California Judges Association PAC which has thrown money to challenged judges across the state. The judge has received nearly $260,000 in contributions this year.

In the other race, Judge Joel S. Agron, sitting in Joshua Tree, is being challenged by Deputy District Attorney Jason Liso. Agron, a superior court judge for about two years, is being accused by opponents of being anti-law enforcement. Liso has received about $85,000 total, much of it from Previti and the San Bernardino County Public Attorneys Association Prosecutors PAC, according to Secretary State campaign finance records. The Fontana Police Association, Rialto Police Benefit Association and the San Bernardino Police Officers Association have also contributed to his campaign.

Liso did not respond to a recent request for comment. There is no way to contact his campaign via his website aside from donating.

The Business Leaders for Ethical Government PAC hasn't contributed money to Liso although a Secretary of State filing lists the PAC as including his name and opposing Agron. Online state records do not include Liso and Agron's name.

Liso, who said he has worked for 13 years in the county, last year told the Daily Journal that Agron was "widely perceived by many in the county to not be fair and impartial, especially in the law enforcement community."

"I am not making my campaign about responding to attacks from my opponents. My campaign is about my own experience," Agron said in an interview.

Agron said he was thoroughly vetted by the bench in San Bernardino County, the governor's office, and the Commission on Judicial Nominees prior to being appointed a judge.

"I think I run courtrooms where litigants leave understanding what happened," said the judge.

The judges PAC has given $25,000 to Agron, who has about $65,000 in contributions total.

"If you look at my contributions, there isn't a single person on that list that I can't tell you who that person is," said Agron.

Elections are Tuesday.