Chris Christie reviews the NJ National Guard

Several senior N.J. National Guard officers accuse the adjutant general, Brig. Gen. Michael Cunniff (right), and the director of the joint staff, Brig. Gen. James Grant, of racial discrimination and retaliation, at the same time the Guard's commander-in-chief, Gov. Chris Christie, considers a 2016 run for president. (Ed Murray | NJ Advance Media for NJ.com)

TRENTON — The New Jersey National Guard prides itself on rigor and readiness, and, from its sprawling base southeast of Trenton, its members became a beacon of help after Tropical Storm Irene and Hurricane Sandy ravaged portions of the state.

But internal records obtained by NJ Advance Media show the Guard now faces a storm of its own, with at least four senior officers, including two top minorities, alleging a "toxic command climate," fueled by racial discrimination and retaliatory actions.

The officers accuse the adjutant general, Brig. Gen. Michael Cunniff, and the director of the joint staff, Brig. Gen. James Grant, of stunting the careers of critics and rewarding loyalists and friends with educational opportunities and promotions.

Among allegations in the documents, one of the most senior officers, who is Hispanic, claimed he was cut out from command decisions, passed over for promotion, undermined by Cunniff and Grant, and eventually forced to go on leave.

Another senior officer claimed he was targeted for not backing the former adjutant general in a 2011 sex scandal that led to the general's removal.

A third claimed he fell out of favor when he questioned the dismissal of a large number of African Americans from a technician force.

And in September, the state inspector general found for a fourth senior officer who claimed Cunniff unfairly targeted him for removal despite his good performance. His removal from a coveted job later was reversed.

Taken together, the records reveal serious discord at the top of the 8,600-member force as the Guard's commander-in-chief, Gov. Chris Christie, eyes a 2016 run for president.

"The organization is less effective, more disruptive and compromised at all levels due to (Cunniff's) lack of leadership," according to a letter sent to the U.S. Department of the Army inspector general by four senior officers, who asked federal authorities to investigate Grant's "tyrannical behavior."

Chief Warrant Officer Patrick Daugherty, a spokesman for the Guard and the state Department of Military and Veterans Affairs, said all complaints are taken seriously and given fair consideration, but there "is not any turmoil in the organization."

"There may be turmoil amongst those who aren't happy with command decisions, but the organization is quite healthy and continues to provide top-notch support to our state and nation," Daugherty said. "We're not a department in crisis right now."

Grant and Cunniff declined comment.

Cunniff oversees the department, with a state budget of about $95 million, and the Air and Army National Guard in the state, which have combined federal budgets of about $234 million. Aside from deploying overseas, Guard members assist in New Jersey with disaster recovery and law enforcement for major events, such as last year's Super Bowl.

Daugherty said Cunniff was not aware of the four complaints contained in the documents obtained by NJ Advance Media until inquiries were made, and thus he could not respond. He said Cunniff had not discussed the issues with Christie's office, and stressed that diversity was strong and celebrated.

Those behind the complaints are all veterans of either Afghanistan or Iraq and have at least 20 years of service. Some also have sent letters to Christie's office requesting he intervene, records show. The governor's office declined comment, as did all those who filed the complaints and sent the letters.

Military experts cautioned the complaints still needed to be investigated, and that, to an extent, grievances over personnel decisions and personality clashes are to be expected in any large organization, including the New Jersey National Guard.

But they said a pattern of problems, particularly concerning promotions and retaliation, could seriously affect morale and rank-and-file confidence in leadership.

"People need to have confidence in the process," said Robert Murrett, a former Navy intelligence officer and professor at Syracuse University. "If you lose that confidence in the process, you've got a problem."

'Toxic command climate'

Senior N.J. National Guard officers allege Brig. Gen. James Grant, a former N.J. State Police major shown here in a file photo from after Hurricane Sandy, is the driving force behind racial bias, cronyism atop the force. (Noah K. Murray | The Star Ledger)

In one recent complaint, filed Jan. 20 with the federal National Guard Bureau, Col. Walter Alvarado accused Cunniff and Grant, a former New Jersey State Police major, of racial discrimination for refusing to offer a promotion to brigadier general.

Alvarado was the first minority Army chief of staff in the state, one of the highest jobs in the Guard, charged with overseeing about 6,200 soldiers, according to the complaint. He held the position for more than three years, and yet was the only Army chief of staff in the past three decades to not be offered the promotion, the complaint stated.

Instead, he alleged, Cunniff, on the advice of Grant, sought the promotion of white officers who were less experienced, less qualified, and who held less senior jobs, and rated them better on evaluations even though Alvarado was the top colonel.

"Favorable personnel actions are strictly based as a reward to individuals BG Grant personally nurtures for their strict loyalty to him and their commitment to his personal agenda," Alvarado, 51, of Howell, wrote, noting Grant's allies were all white males.

Alvarado said in the complaint Cunniff "abdicated the responsibility of managing, leading and running" the Army Guard to Grant, who created a "toxic command climate." He said he was denied access to Cunniff and forced to go through Grant, while the chief of staff for the Air Guard was given "unfettered access" to the adjutant general.

While Cunniff delegates some duties, Daugherty denied the adjutant general had "abdicated" to Grant and said he remains firmly in charge.

In the complaint, Alvarado said Grant undermined him, usurped many of his responsibilities and dealt directly with his staff, often putting people in the "compromising position" of having to choose between loyalties.

Alvarado said Grant also denied him training opportunities and spread rumors he was a "womanizer," on "thin ice," and "did not know (his) place."

He said he was targeted with an internal investigation after Col. Christopher Perron, a Grant ally, complained Alvarado and two others had violated his privacy by viewing his records in a computer database. Alvarado said he was cleared of wrongdoing.

In 2013, Alvarado alleged in his complaint, Cunniff, on Grant's advice, put him up for consideration before an Active Service Management Board. That board reviews full-time active guard reserve officers with 18 or more years of federal service to recommend if they should keep their jobs or be let go to make room for new promotions.

After the board finished but before formal notification, Alvarado said, word leaked it had recommended he be removed from his job, causing him to be "humiliated and embarrassed" in the work place. The results were later thrown out due to "material error," and Alvarado did not lose his job, according to the complaint.

The problem with the board, Daugherty said, was that its members were not properly instructed how to carry out their review.

Last year, after repeated attempts to learn why he had not been offered a promotion to brigadier general, Alvarado said in the complaint Cunniff told him Dec. 2 he would be replaced by Perron and must take leave until his May retirement date.

"This is not the way a competent and caring leader removes any officer, especially a senior officer, after almost 30 years of service," Alvarado wrote, adding the matter was handled in an "unprofessional and demeaning" and "hostile" manner.

Daugherty defended Perron's performance in the more than two months since he has become the Army chief of staff, saying he has made more than 150 promotions.

He said the former chief of staff, without referring to Alvarado by name, failed to properly manage the force and promote people, creating a bottleneck. Alvarado, however, contends in his complaint he was unable to do his job because Grant made it impossible.

'Professionally neutered'

In related allegations, filed Dec. 8 with the Guard's Equal Employment Opportunity officer, Col. John Langston accused Cunniff and Grant of racial discrimination for not considering him for Alvarado's job as chief of staff.

Langston, a full-time active guard member who is black, claimed he was qualified for the position and had excellent evaluations, including one from August in which Grant himself stated he was "one of the top three colonels," was "earmarked...for a brigade-level command" and should be groomed "for promotion to brigadier general."

After being made chief-of-staff, the complaint said, Perron reassigned Langston from director of operations and training at the Joint Training and Training Development Center to commanding officer, a move he called a "demotion." Perron declined comment for this story.

"I am being professionally neutered," wrote Langston, 51, of Newark.

He said the move was retaliation for questioning Perron's staff about the recent departure of six black members from a technician force. He said in the complaint Perron came to his office "incensed" and wanted to know why the inquiry was made, and then became agitated and demanded his source for the information.

"I believe (Perron's) past relationship with BG Grant has earned him preferential treatment," Langston wrote. "I further believe BG Grant and Col. Perron conspired to deny me education, and removed me from my position solely because I am black."

Langston also alleged he was denied continuing education opportunities afforded to other colonels, saying in the complaint, "the only exception is I am black."

Alvarado and Langston are not the first to accuse Grant of discrimination.

In 2001, while Grant worked for State Police, an administrative law judge ruled in favor of a female sergeant who accused him of gender discrimination, stripping her of duties, subjecting her to an internal investigation and blocking future promotion.

The judge noted "the flagrant hostility of Grant" and ruled his testimony, including his denials in the matter, were "not credible," according to the decision.

Daugherty, a spokesman for the Guard, declined comment on the State Police case.

'Accusations of disloyalty'

Maj. Gen. Glenn Rieth, the Guard's former adjutant general under Gov. Chris Christie (left), resigned in 2011 after being caught at the office having inappropriate relations with a woman who worked for him. (Andrew Mills | The Star-Ledger)

In another complaint, filed Dec. 12 with the state inspector general, Lt. Col. Brian Scully, a full-time active guard member, claimed Grant and Perron targeted him after he backed a colleague who caught the former adjutant general, Maj. Gen. Glenn Rieth, having an affair.

Rieth, who was married, resigned in 2011 after Christie's office learned he had engaged in an inappropriate relationship with a female subordinate. The general and the aide were caught in his office touching each other, according to published reports.

According to Scully's complaint, prior to Rieth's resignation, a staff sergeant "accidentally witnessed the adultery" between Rieth and the subordinate and reported it to the state inspector general. The subordinate was a civilian government relations liaison.

Scully said the staff sergeant feared Rieth and Grant would target her for what she had reported, the complaint said.

He said Rieth and Grant "explicitly and implicitly wanted me to discredit (the staff sergeant), ruin her reputation, and choose to defend MG Rieth instead of standing with (her)." By refusing, he said he "incurred the personal wrath" of both men.

He said Perron, a competitor for promotion, was routinely favored and eventually promoted over him in retaliation for his decision, according to his complaint. He also claimed Perron, working in concert with Grant, sought to remove him from his job by submitting his name to go before a retention board similar to the one that reviewed Alvarado. But he said he was never told what had happened or if the board was held.

Last year, about two months after Scully's wife died from breast cancer, he was interviewed as part of the same internal investigation involving Alvarado, into whether someone had violated Perron's privacy, according to the complaint.

He said in the complaint the interview was conducted by one of Grant's allies, Col. Kevin Hegarty, and several months later, he was told the charge had been substantiated. But he said Grant, Perron and Hegarty conspired to cook up the charge to block future promotion, never allowed him to refute the finding and circumvented his superiors.

"This is egregious retribution," said Scully, 48, of Marlton, who has since requested retirement. "I am ashamed of my uniform and in my 30 years I have never witnessed such a morally bankrupt group of self-centered leaders."

Targeted for removal

Entrance to Wrightstown Gate at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, home of the New Jersey Army and Air National Guard's 8,600 members. (Michael Mancuso | The Times of Trenton)

Another Guard senior officer, Lt. Col. Charles McDonald, 43, of Mount Laurel, filed a complaint with the state inspector general in August alleging he was targeted for removal from his job as part of a retention board review so someone could be promoted in his place.

The three-person Selective Retention Board was convened in June in Atlantic City and charged with reviewing officers with 20 or more years of qualifying experience in order to determine who should and should not keep their jobs.

The board recommended the removal of 28 of the 87 people it reviewed, records show, including a colonel who Cunniff has submitted for a highly prized promotion to brigadier general. Daugherty declined to identify the colonel up for promotion.

With a stroke of a pen, however, internal records show Cunniff saved that colonel and 25 others from losing their jobs, leaving two: Capt. Wesley Martin and McDonald.

Martin already had separated from service, records show, which left only McDonald on the list to be removed.

According to his complaint, McDonald said the board might not have had the proper information on his career because of an inaccurate file, and that he was targeted to open a full-time active guard reserve officer slot for someone else.

"I do not have a single piece of paper or even note in my career reflecting poor performance," he wrote in the complaint.

He was told of his separation in a July 10 letter from Cunniff, in which the adjutant general noted, in part, "I can assure you that the selection board discharged its duties in a thorough and impartial manner," according to a copy of the letter obtained by NJ Advance Media.

About a month after filing his complaint, on Sept. 30, McDonald was told the state inspector general had substantiated the allegations in his complaint and the case had been closed, records show.

In a Jan. 15 memo, the chief of the personnel policy division announced the results of the board had been voided "based on the substantiated findings of procedural violations determined by an inspector general inquiry."

Daugherty acknowledged McDonald's complaint was substantiated, but said Cunniff actually chose to throw out the results because the inspector general inquiry also discovered the board should not have considered one person who went before it.

Cunniff had not raised concern about the board results before McDonald's inspector general complaint because he was not aware "anything was amiss," Daugherty said.

He said Cunniff originally chose to get rid of one individual, without referring to McDonald by name, because he was a full-time active guard reserve officer, there are only a limited number of those jobs and sometimes room must be made for promotion.

"In order to promote growth and development and keep things healthy, sometimes those individuals have to be notified that, 'Thank you for your service, but it's time to go,'" Daugherty said. "In this case, the adjutant general had to make that call."

He said Cunniff, after consulting with staff, determined everyone else recommended for removal was still needed. When asked about the colonel who was recommended for removal while at the same time being put up for promotion, Daugherty said retention boards review only paper records and do not get a full picture of people's performance.

NJ.com Photos of the Week: Mar. 13 - Mar. 4 54 Gallery: NJ.com Photos of the Week: Mar. 13 - Mar. 4

Christopher Baxter may be reached at cbaxter@njadvancemedia.com. Follow him on Twitter @cbaxter1. Find NJ.com Politics on Facebook.