Mateo didn't initially accuse anyone of a crime.
He explained that he'd become uncomfortable with several work orders he was being asked to complete.
Certain jobs were marked as urgent replacements even when the reported problem appeared limited.
Some properties were listed for inspection before homeowners formally requested service.
And several repair assignments followed complaints made through the HOA compliance office.
Mateo said he'd assumed the association had a legitimate process for identifying those properties.
Then he learned that some homeowners were refusing the proposed upgrades.
That made him uncomfortable.
The turning point came when a supervisor asked him to prepare a replacement estimate for a sprinkler system without conducting a full inspection.
When Mateo questioned the scope, the supervisor told him the HOA had already determined the system was noncompliant.
He asked for the supporting assessment.
None was provided.
Then he recognized my address.
He'd serviced a neighboring property and knew the irrigation system in my yard had recently been professionally maintained.
He remembered seeing me work with the independent contractor.
He also knew CanyonMark had repeatedly tried to secure the job.
When he saw reports about Patricia damaging my sprinkler, he began reconsidering the earlier assignments.
He contacted a lawyer.
Then spoke with investigators.
Detective Ortega treated his information as something requiring verification.
Mateo wasn't automatically absolved of any questionable work he'd performed.
Nor was he assumed to know the motives of everyone above him.
But he could identify company procedures, work orders, and people who had directed certain actions.
He also described a meeting involving Patricia and CanyonMark's operations manager.
The meeting occurred shortly before the damage to Evelyn Parker's sprinklers.
Mateo remembered Patricia complaining that residents were refusing to cooperate with the conservation program.
She allegedly said the association needed a way to demonstrate how expensive noncompliance could become.
The words were disturbing.
But they weren't proof of a specific act of vandalism.
Then the investigators obtained the company records through lawful processes.