The Piercing Truth

This is right from the dictionary and seems to describe Albuquerque, Berry and Schultz. Fascism (f ash ,izem) noun An authoritarian right wing system of government and/or social organization. (in general use) extreme right wing, authoritarian, chauvinistic and/or intolerant views or practices. Fascism tends to include a belief in the supremacy of one group over another, national, ethnic, especially social strata or monetarily; a contempt for democracy, an insistence on obedience to a powerful leader, and a strong demagogic approach. Compliments of one of our Eyes

Apr 17, 2008

Motion Failed

Sergeant Paul Heh's motion to re-vote on the narrowly passed APOA - City of Albuquerque contract has failed. The final vote was 81 for a re-vote and 192 against.

Our Eyes tell us that probationary officers were allowed to vote... again. But with over a 100 vote margin our guess is that those in favor of the new contract would have carried the day anyway.

It remains to be seen if the original vote and tonight's vote that included probationary officers was legal under the organization's bylaws. There also seems to be language in the contract that says that the "City of Albuquerque recognizes the APOA as the exclusive bargaining agent for the permanent full-time non-probationary sworn police officers through the rank of captain." Tonight's vote included probationary officers who are not technically covered by the contract so their participation in the voting process could be considered inappropriate. That's certainly an argument that could be made if senior officers choose to take the matter to court.

Ultimately we don't know what will happen. There's a motion on the floor to authorize the expenditure of union funds to pay for an attorney to file an unfair labor practices suit against the union... as if that has any chance of passing. There's also talk of supervisors leaving the APOA.

We don't believe that any of this is good for the officers of APD and in the long run we're concerned that we won't be able to recruit fast enough to make up for trained officers leaving for more profitable jobs in other jurisdictions. None of this is good for those of us who make Albuquerque home.

We don't blame the junior officer of the department. They're doing what they think is best for their careers and families. They are getting paid now and there's a really good argument that they should. Our hope is that we will be able to retain them once their ability to climb through the ranks tops out. After all there are only so many sergeants, so many lieutenants, ands so many commanders positions available.

For the next three years it looks as if this is the contract they will have to live with and do so by their own choice. We truly hope that the rank and file can come together under this new contract and both sides stand to learn from the experience. We know that the professionals working in the Albuquerque Police Department will always do their jobs as they always have... with honor and integrity.

66 comments:

Anonymous said...

EYE, Here is what the APOA By-Laws state. This was provided by a member (read out loud) and should answer many questions. Folks are looking at the contract and forgetting about the by-laws that have been in place for many, many years.

ARTICLE III
Membership
3.01
Membership in the Association shall be restricted to persons who are active sworn police officers of the City of Albuquerque Police Department, Open Space Rangers and Aviation Police. Upon filling out a payroll deduction slip, eligible personnel will become an active member of the Association. The Association will represent all members of the bargaining unit in contract negotiations, in a criminal proceeding resulting from an official act while on duty, and any city internal grievance before the City Personnel Board or any other internal departmental grievance procedure as prescribed in the collective bargaining agreement or City Policy, but only when appropriate and upon approval of two-thirds (2/3) majority vote of a seated quorum of the Executive Board.


This clearly states that cadets cannot be members (nor vote). It also shows that probationary personnel, once they pay their dues, are considered members. While a contract with the city may not cover probationary personnel (specifically dealing with termination) the by laws allow for their participation in the Association to include voting. For those that use the excuse that this has not happened in the past....there were numerous members at the meeting tonight who stated that they voted on contracts in the past as probationary (P2/C) employees.

What has taken place in the past makes no difference. If the by laws that are currently in place allow such action then so be it. The argument of "it was never allowed before" is frivolous and without any legal merit. To waste APOA funds on "suing ourselves" because a few folks did not get their way on the re-vote is ludicrous and does nothing to enhance the image of Officers with the citizens we are sworn to protect.

Every one is entitled to their opinion however, starting a frivolous lawsuit does not help the issue nor change the outcome of both votes.

Good luck to all and stay safe.

Anonymous said...

Isn't there something like 800 or 900 APD officers? Judging from the turnout at tonight's re-vote, not too many of them were up in arms over the new contract, right? According to this blog, "APD officers have vehemently split over the contract". Oh well. Drama over.

Anonymous said...

It’s a matter of supply and demand. When we start having as much difficulty retaining Sergeants and Lieutenants as we do recruiting new officers, the contracts will be written with them in mind. If indeed we start loosing supervisors and senior officers by the truckload, it will be fixed next go around. I don’t think that will happen though. We are still the best paid department in the state under this contract. We have to recognize that the department is and organization charged with protecting the citizens of Albuquerque. Their primary function is not to pamper it's employees. All the benefits we receive are the result of labor laws and what the department heads see as necessary to recruit and retain qualified employees. No particular group has any god given right or benefits that another group does not. Sounds a lot like Democracy and Capitalism to me.

Anonymous said...

HEH AND THE HIJACKERS LOST AGAIN.....Hopefully we can change wording in the contract so we dont have this problem anymore, but you can not HIJACK an election for your own gain.

Anonymous said...

Schultz and his people need to go!!!! They have really divided and split up this dept causing very serious damage to the morale!

Anonymous said...

Funny that the first one to cast stones on this thread is one defending the contract.

I don't understand the difficulty in addressing the most obvious issue: the original vote for the contract was unfair and smelled of really bad politics. How is it the membership gets 30 days to mull over a motion but not even 48 hours to vote on a three-year contract?

Why is that????

To many of the officers I speak with, that is the most burning issue. They, and myself, can live with this, or any contract, if the vote was fair. All that is being asked is that there be a vote on the contract that is fair. Staunch defenders of it should recognize that it will for sure pass again but this APOA will do a great service to ALL but having a revote to put this issue to bed. If not, then there are enough people that will drag this issue out on and on and on...

Anonymous said...

Only 81 officers showed up to support their cause last night. That doesn't sound like the dept. is split in half over this controversy. It also doesn't seem like there is a whole lot of "staunch defenders" of the contract, either. Much ado about nothing. Yawn.

Anonymous said...

No one will leave over this contract! Mark my words!

Eye why dont you publish the amount of senior officers and supervisors that actually decide to leave specifically because of this contract.

I'm sure everyone will be enlightened to see Heh and his hijackers facilitated a futile attempt at chaos.

I would specifically like to see if Heh and Garcia the loudest opponents actually retire over this contract. The answer will be,,,I seriously doubt it.

Anonymous said...

I'm not sure how this could be Chief Schultz's fault? The membership voted and it passed. I doubt Schultz voted either way.

The only one who started the split was Heh when he got 80 other officers who agreed with him to try and stop the contract.

80 officers out of 900 or 1000 or 860 or whatever our manning level is. 80 officers didnt like the contract passed by the majority of the membership.

Heh its time to start healing or retiring. Good luck to you and your loyal supporters but the rest of us wanna get back to protecting the citizens who will ultimately have to pay for that raise which was approved AGAIN!

Anonymous said...

The "many officers" the last poster refers to are a very small minority of the department. I am one of the senior guys that voted no the first go around. After I began talking to different officers at court and on scenes, I realized that the vast mojority of the department were for the new contract because no one, I repeat, no one is losing any money with the exception of the Lt.'s. Some of us will not get the same increase as others, but it is a increase never the less. The divisiveness caused by the motion to re-vote was appalling. I do not believe there could have been a re-vote anyway since there was a clearly legal vote the first time and the contract was signed off on and sent to the city council. This being said, I changed my mind and I voted to kill the motion last night. I know that I was not the only senior guy to do this.
Peace to all and let this go. B safe and lets take care of each other out there.

Anonymous said...

Here come the retirements! I hope they get alot of cops w this new 28 dollar deal!

Anonymous said...

The contract was voted on and passed. People complained, a motion was seconded, and another vote held after a thirty day period. It passed again. it's time to stop the mud slinging and move on.

Anonymous said...

HUCK FEH, YES I SAID HUCK FEH AND HIS HIJACKERS!

Anonymous said...

snore.....

Anonymous said...

AUCK FPOA! :)

Anonymous said...

I want to point out to one poster that perhaps he posted mis-information. The intent of this is to not fan the coals but to state some facts: Bylaws only govern the actual organization, in this case APOA. The bylaws do not dictate whom can actually be in the collective bargaining unit only who they(APOA) wants in their organization). The defined collective bargaining unit was defined at the onset when an actual petition was filed with the Alb. Labor-Management Board and in that petition for recognition the only persons recognized to be recognized in the collective bargaining unit were all non-probationary law enforcement up to include Captains. With that said durring collective bargaining agreement votes the only persons that can vote on the actual contract are non-probationary dues paying members. Probationary dues paying members of the APOA can vote on any internal organizational issue they wish such as for executive board nominations and votes etc.. If you look at the following:

§ 3-2-4 RIGHT TO ORGANIZE AND BARGAIN COLLECTIVELY.
(A) City employees have the right to form, join and otherwise participate in the activities of an employee organization of their own choosing for the purpose of bargaining collectively with the city government, and for other lawful reasons. City employees also have the right to refuse to join and participate in the activities of employee organizations. An employee organization which has been certified by the Mayor as the exclusive bargain representative for an appropriate bargaining unit of the city employees may bargain collectively with the city government concerning hours,salary, wages, working conditions, and all terms and conditions of employment.

Clearly probationary employees are not part of the collective bargaining unit but they are or can be part of APOA. Therefore not being part of the collective bargaining unit they cannot vote on collective bargaining agreements.

CITY EMPLOYEE. Any permanent, non-probationary employee of the city except officials elected by popular vote or appointed to fill vacancies in elective offices;
members of boards, commissions, and heads of agencies appointed by the Mayor; heads
of agencies appointed by boards and commissions; supervisors; temporary or seasonal
employees; employees paid wholly and directly from funds of the United States Government; and individuals privy to confidential matters of the city government
affecting the employer-employee relationship.

Probationary employees voting on a collective bargaining agreement in my opinion constitutes a violation of the Alb. Employee-Management Relations Act as well as the State of New Mexicos Employee Bargaining Act (PEBA). Simply stated the vote constitutes a Prohibitve Labor Violation on part of the APOA as well as the City if they except probationary employees voting on the agreement..... The vote does not violate APOA bylaws because those are internal and have nothing to do with the actual difined collective bargaing unit by PEBA....

Anonymous said...

Judging by the general quality of the APD officers I've met, we need to fire them all and start over with much higher pay, much higher requirements - and an ominous level of personal responsibility for their actions.
Then, any officer who ever caused a judgment or settlement against the city should be permanently banned.
Until then, however, APD is merely the most dangerous armed gang in Albuquerque.

Anonymous said...

Well Well, once again Paul flexed his mighty little muscle and also shot his tiny little wad and nothing happened. He should be totally embarrassed with himself. Time to go Paul, take your sorry little fat ass & hit the door & don't ever come back. You've done enough damage to yourself, and this entire Dept. I don't know how you can still come to work and show your face....Take your $15K bonus and retire, your 15 minutes are long over....

Anonymous said...

Gosh. It looks like the readership of this blog has really dropped off. I think that's a good thing and I'm going to follow suit. Nothing to see here.

Anonymous said...

I saw Chief Schultz on TV last night and the guy doesn't even have a chin, his neck is huge! Also, can someone teach your new PIO how to speak. She made absolutely no sense.

Anonymous said...

The people who are going to retire were going to retire anyway. Notice that Paul Heh, Mark Garcia, and the rest of the gang....were the first in line to get their $15,000 Officer Retention Bonus money.
Everyone in this contract recieved a raise, just as the previous poster mentions. Nothing was illegal about the first vote....your $6 fair share gives you the right to vote....if people weren't allowed to vote in past contracts...that should be taken up with past administrations...because they weren't following the rules.
Sgt Garcia thinks that moving the Sgts and Lts to a different Union???? Whow is creating the division now. Where is the leadership within the department??? Whatever happened to leading by example???? So we are going to operate by the "I didn't get what I want, so I am taking my ball and going home" mentality???
Now Lt Jake Salazar has put forth a motion for the cash strapped APOA to fund a lawyer and sue ITSELF????
There is a certain group of Sgt's and Lt's have proven themselves.....they have shown you their true colors.

Anonymous said...

TIME TO MOVE ON......Change the bylaws if you have a problem with them.....GARCIA, HEH, SALAZAR,ESTRADA,leave, shut up, or change bylaws...We are trying to heal and you area trying to divide..

Anonymous said...

I have to agree with Mark Garcia. Why would sgts and lts sit back and allow the association that is supposed to represent them, take money from them to fund others. This contract has shown it is time for the sgts and lts to break away and form their own group, that way they can't be raided in the future. This is a good example of leading by example. If you continue to sit back and allow others to take from you and you do nothing, you are not a leader. They are moving in a direction to protect what they have earned. I think they are doing what is best for their ranks. Isn't that what the younger officers just did with voting in the contract?

Sgts and Lts it is time to form your own association. No one will look after your interests but you.

Anonymous said...

Wow, the APD head sworn in charge of tech know how to write mean words.

Maybe you need to get a life and stop kiss raymond's can. You look like a dork and now you've proved that you are one.

Anonymous said...

Thank you to the person who posted above with the CBU information and the petition information, but I have a feeling that you interpreted incorrectly on a couple of points...but great post!!!!.

The city recognizes/certifies the APOA as the employee organization and exclusive bargaining representative for the employees. The city does not define who can vote, but simply says that it will allow the employee organization to make the decisions for the employees as the representative of the employees. Basically...
The APOA is the representative to the city...The members of the APOA vote (probationary and non) and that is presented to the city. Nothing says that has any say whatsoever who gets to vote or not....the APOA renders that decision. And if you read the first caller...APOA defines the member as active sworn police officers who have filled out a payroll deduction slip....probationary or not.

Anonymous said...

Sgt. Heh, do the wise thing and retire...then come back as a retiree and double dip. You will be making over 100 grand a year between retirement and salary and not have to live in metro court with drunks...and just think in 2010 you'll be making just shy of 59,000 a year base pay....not to mention overtime and holidays etc. etc.

Anonymous said...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! DID EVERYONE REALLY LISTEN TO LT. SALAZAR... I TALKED TO THE PAST PRESIDENTS HE SAID, SISI, PAUL, PETE, LAWERENCE....NEVER MENTIONED ALEX..WHO HAS TO MUCH RESPECT TO SPEAK WITH A PISS ANT LIKE SALAZAR... SALAZAR IS SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN A BOARD MEMBER...

CONGRATS TO RON, BEN, ANDREW AND MIKE... FOR MAKING THE HUGE STRIDES IN CLEANING UP THE GARBAGE THAT PAST PRESIDENTS HAVE LEFT THE ASSOCATION IN....LIKE THE ONES THAT SALAZAR TALKED TO HAHAHAHAHAHAH.

CONGRATS TO THE SGTS. AND VETEREN 34'S ON UR UPCOMING RETIREMENT.... WE WILL MISS YOU!!!!! WE WILL MISS YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF THE JOB!!!! BUT WE WILL NOT MISS YOUR FRAKIN ME ATTITUDE!!!! SO FRAKIN GOOD BYE!!!

Anonymous said...

HEADLINE NEWS:
NEW HIRED OFFICERS ARE NO LONGER AT WILL AND ARE NOT PROBATIONARY IN ANY SENSE OF THE WORD!!!!!!!!!!!!

If the City of Alb. allows probationary employees to vote on a collective bargaining agreement WOW!! Now the City can no longer have probationary employees within the ranks of APD/APOA because they now have property interest in and are part of the collective bargaining agreement. So Probationers now have the full protection of the contract... No where else can a probationary employee vote on a collective bargaining agreement or have it apply to them in any form. When unions form via the petition for recognition, probationary employees are not allowed to vote because they cannot be part of the collective bargaining unit and also because they are not covered by the agreement, they are in essence at-will employees. Either the City of Alb. has it right or the rest of the state has it wrong..... Sound like probationary APD officers can litterly have APOA fight tooth and nail for them due to them being covered by the full collective bargaining agreement and having all the benifits afforded to and for them by being a full dues paying APOA member.....
Whats next...Applicants will be allowed to vote so long as they pay dues via a bylaws change and we all know that the bylaws rule and thats that. The End

Anonymous said...

When you think about it, hardly anyone voted. It looks like most of the cops are just doing their job and trying to stay out of all the drama. Good for you guys! And women. :)

Anonymous said...

Why did APD change out Trish Hoffman the PIO for the new older looking gal. Trish was sooooo much better looking and a much better PIO. This new girl studders and can not complete a thought. She bounches around. Please go back to Trish!

Anonymous said...

TIME TO GO PAUL....YOU ARE NO LONGER WANTED HERE. Take your sorry attitude along with those other loosers you hang with, Al, Joe & Mark & hit the door. Someone said retire & come back & double dip...I hardly think the Dept is that desperate that they would hire any of you back. I believe many of the officers would gladly take extra calls to bring up the slack in an effort to avoid the likes of you ever being hired back. You've done enough to damage this Dept & it's employees for one career....Time to go!

Anonymous said...

We are all just waiting until this chief and his henchmen leave this dept in 15 months! They have really screwed it up and would have really f*@k us over if we voted.

Anonymous said...

Ron Olivas Torres stop patting yourself on the back with your own posts. Frinkin give it a break already!

Anonymous said...

BRING THE HOT BLONDE BACK, THIS NEW ONE SUCKS.

Anonymous said...

No one cares anymore,,,its done. Move on, to a new subject like how many bad guys are going to jail.

Yaaawwwwn,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Anonymous said...

Mark Garcia needs to retire already and go into business chopping down some of the old cottonwood trees around the Bosque with them fake CHOMPERS he has. I'm glad you guys got a deserved raise!

Anonymous said...

Still no matter what else you say, Paul Heh did the right thing by standing up for what he believed in, stood up against all of the controversy, stood up against an investigation, which is still ongoing, and as we all know was specifically instigated to shut him up, and is still standing up against a bunch of HIS FELLOW COPS that are calling him names and telling him to retire. No matter what else you say, he's got balls hanging, and did what he believed in, which I don't see many of the rest of you doing. And he was right about one more thing, I don't want the cops in my city to be in it for the money. I want them to feel the need to do what is right. I want them to hold that thin blue line that separates us from the criminal element that IS in it for the money whether it be drugs, prostitution, theft or whatever. When your police force only works for the money, the next thing you know, they'll be taking the money, and we will be no better off than any other city where all the cops are on the take. Guess I better paperclip that 20 to my license, and prepare to take my tickets out in trade. I want my cops to be in it to do what is right, to do what they believe in, and to want to make a difference in the place they live for not only us, but their families too. Cops that are in it for the money are just whores, working for a living.
So say what you want about Paul Heh, at least he did something about the fucked up mess this dept has become, and the rest of you should be ashamed that you didn't support him, if for no other reason than just the fact that he's under investigation for it.

Anonymous said...

Wow you spoke to past presidents. That's impressive. Did Pete Dwyer tell you why he was replaced? Did Lawrence Torres tell you how to get a good hook up with a city job? Did Paul Pacheco tell you how to provide campaign money to friends? WTF???

Anonymous said...

So much hate and discontent for our leaders? This place wouldn't run without sergeants and lieutenants...especially sergeants. By hating the leadership because of the few that may have cast a bad light on the rank you seem to be throwing the baby out with the bath water. If you don't like the leadership, then test and try to change it. That is what I am doing...I just can't pass that stupid assessment center.

-signed...soon to be sergeant (I hope)

Anonymous said...

HOT BLONDE???? HAHA YOU OBVIOUSLY HAVEN'T SEEN HER LATELY.

Anonymous said...

Hot blonde??????? WTF!!!!! That's a man baby!!!!!

Anonymous said...

The above comment is just plain mean. Trish did a good job as PIO and is on to better things. You guys need to stop slamming eachother on this site and just comment on the issues at hand.

Anonymous said...

Now that everyone of the "me getting mine group" has had their way. Let's see who complains the most when they have to face the bill collectors for their new money when their pay has to go for car payments when their city owned cars cannot go home with them. Or is momma going to have to hire a baby sitter so she can work so they can afford another car? Well, you asked for it and unless the City Council says "WHOA". NO GO. Its a done deal and soon to be ex Mayor will still be your friend, but, remember you have to be carefull what you ask for.

As far as what Sgt Heh tried to do was only to protect YOU. If he was doing anything wrong why is he being investigated? Duh, somebody didn't want it to go that way and was afraid it would. That's why the new contract was NOT posted as is required. Lot's of luck to you all, YOU'll NEED IT.

Anonymous said...

I was going to lateral over here, but I wouldn't work patrol 5-8's for $50/hour...best of luck to y'all.

Mike C.

Anonymous said...

bring trish back!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

What part of bringing the starting pay up to industry standard don't you get? It's all about recruitment. Why is that so hard to understand? New recruits WILL help restore the health of this police department.

Anonymous said...

Chief, This new PIO does not impress me much. I like the blonde better. She is much better looking than the new one who looks like she's has had way too much sun on her face. Is this new one even a cop? Please bring back the blonde.

Anonymous said...

Yep, take home cars are going BYE BYE. Way to go greedy rooks....you bit yourselves (and the rest of us) right square in the ass.

Anonymous said...

Take the cars - they are a bigger detirment than help to the average officer. THen they can debate that $3000 a year the city has been swearing they are worth since 1980

Anonymous said...

Now that the "me getting mine group" has failed, everyone can get back to work.

Anonymous said...

Fire Paul Heh! What a worthless little toad. Greed got the better of him. He tried to pad his pockets on the backs of the other officers & it didn't work....See ya Paul. Hold your head up high but don't bump it exiting through that little doggie door at city hall. Time to go Pablo....Put a fork in him.

Anonymous said...

Yo, "Eye", Fall asleep?

Anonymous said...

Please take away those free cars! They do nothing for the officers! They wont even stop to help me when i'm broken down on the freeway!I'm disgusted by those free cars!

Mayor please listen to us citizens and take away the cars from those lazy, cheap ass officers!

Anonymous said...

paul heh,brad winter cliff saylor,mark garcia,they conspired together to try and topple the apoa and use the cops as fodder. you were willing to threaten our way of life so you can take shots a the mayor......you brought everything you had, you and tom grover tried to get at our president by sabotaging his personal life and reputation, were gonna back our guys to the end and protect them from jackals like you, you brought all you had and ambushed him and the board. when the smoke cleared I only saw Ron and the board there,,,,,ready to back the other 900 of us who want to be a part of this family. not try to tear it down with lies and rumors. Talked to the other presidents??? the ones that put us in this mess? Paul Pacheco nearly destroyed the union for his personal gain.......his response...me first whatever is left over add a step on top and screw everyone else

Anonymous said...

Sure, take away the cars. It will then take hours for SWAT to respond, Freeways/roads will be closed longer while the fatal teams go retrieve their cars. Calls will be holding longer until Officers get out of briefing and do a complete safety check on the vehicle they are about to drive that have been sitting during their off time. Calls will stack due to off duty officers no longer assisting..............To the person who complained about being stranded....try AAA, they are probably not responding to an emergency like the Officer(s) that drove by you.

Anonymous said...

i have never seen such a bunch of spoiled brats.. these rooks have such a sense of entitlement..give me a break. by the way.. cant bring back Trish, once she was hired, she went right into I.A. unlike every other person she didnt have to go back into the field. She stood there in ops review and told the chief she was not going to go back and work graveyard.. she got whatever she wanted. now we have nadine who is absolutely worthless. she thinks she is high and mighty and has no idea what she is doing. she treats people like crap, unless of course she can get something out of you.please chief, get rid of her!unless of course ed sauer asked you for a favor HAHAHAHA

Anonymous said...

Paul, don't retire because this chief will not hire you back! Look at how he screwed over the last Academy LT. The chief would not hire him back as a rehire when he applied a few months back. The chief did hire his worthless lazy friend back as a SRO and hired back all the dirty deputy chiefs. The chief, however, would not hire back a guy that could have really helped the recruiting effort! The chief was just intimidated by the pasted academy staff who left because they would not put up with the chief's B.S. to hire all these unqualified officers just for the numbers!

Just hang on Paul, this administration will be gone soon, 15 months! This chief has run off so many good officers and supervisors who were not going to bend to the Mayor's every request to cover his crimes and injustices.

Anonymous said...

I just read the Journal article where Schultz finally admits he counts any person (full time or part time) in his numbers game. This is in direct conflict with the actual staffing level given him by the mayor and council which firmly states APD is budgeted for 1,100 FULL TIME sworn officers.

Schultz spins again when he says he thinks we will get there by December 1 of this year (of course he is counting about 60 part time officers in this number).

What Schultz should be looking at is the number come Jan 1 2009. After all the veteran officers who can retire this year do (why would they stay for the contract they were given). APD will be down a large number of officers again. Put that together with the legislature again introducing bills to repeal the Retiree Return to Work program and Schultz is going to be in big trouble with the number again.

Schultz just can't seem to put two and two together and plan APD's future in a logical way. There may be a lot of newer officers coming in the front door, but there will be a large number of experienced officers going out the back.

Anonymous said...

Stop making crap up, no one will leave. Everyone will stay put right where they are at. This is because ultimately the veterans are just as greedy as the rooks. The veterens however have been playin the game alot longer. Enter Paul Heh.

Anonymous said...

Trish looks nothing in person like she does on TV and Nadine is an imposter police Officer.

At least Walsh was a real Police Officer way way back in the day. Now he's retired and doesn't care about the games around him.

Put Trish and Nadine on the streets where officers belong and not hiding away in sweet positions.

Anonymous said...

Why is it that "The Eye" has quit posting info about IP Addresses soon to be released....Anyone but me read the AP Article in the Journal the other day about Eclipse Aviation filing a civil suit against this "Blogger" host in an effort to identify and stop people from posting comments about the airplanes? Eclipse won, and now has handed Google a subpeona to force them to hand over the IP Addresses of all who posted on that site....The end is near people, Blogger is the host site for this blog. It's only a matter of time before someone else comes along and get's the IP Addresses for us.....

Anonymous said...

"...the end is near." Huh, it's already here with Marty getting his third term. Long live the eye!

Anonymous said...

Doom and gloom!!!! Enuf already!

Anonymous said...

I was going to lateral over here, but I wouldn't work patrol 5-8's for $50/hour...best of luck to y'all.

Mike C.

GOT REJECTED AT CHIEFS SELECTION AGAIN MIKE??? GIVE UP MAN, YOU"RE NOT GOOD ENOUGH, FACE IT.

Anonymous said...

Trish aint no hot blonde. She's a stuck up and very rude b*tch. And she is NOT better looking thank Nadine.

Anonymous said...

both trish and nadine think they are wayyyyyyyy too good for everyone,, unless you are in their circle.
this department has gone downhill so fast and the fifth floor doesnt give a rats ass. they do not care about officer safety, they do not care about the officers wishes. all they care about is their testosterone. .