In the interview (see it here: http://krqe.com/2014/02/28/ex-apd-chiefs-new-gig-is-with-taser/) Schultz, confirms that he started working with Taser in October of last year "after he retired." Schultz also makes the curious statement, "I’m not in sales. I just talk about lessons learned and it’s up to individual agencies to decide what they want to do."
Please, quit with the word mincing Mr. Schultz. We all know your effective date where you no longer were on the city payroll was this past January, so this notion of you having retired in October is a lie. And really? If you're helping agencies make decision based off of your "lessons learned" then your helping Taser with their sales. We all know that the second your talks result in a lost sale by Taser you'll be kicked to the curb.
But none of this surprises us from a former employee that did nothing but cost the taxpayers millions in unnecessary judgements, ruin lives of good officers, destroy a once great department, be an active conspirator and perpetrator in civil rights violations of your own employees, and participate in endless criminal coverups.
What we want to know is will city council step up and demand enforcement of it's own ordinances REGARDLESS who the violator is. You see, the city has these as its ordinances:
§ 3-3-7 CONFLICTS OF INTEREST; FORMER EMPLOYEES.
(A) A former employee shall not within one year after the date of termination from employment represent any person or business in connection with a matter in which the former employee has performed an official act, unless the Chief Administrative Officer consents to such representation. No person or business with which a former employee is associated may knowingly undertake or continue a private representation in such a matter unless:
(1) The disqualified former employee is screened from participation in the matter and is apportioned no part of the compensation therefrom; and
(2) Written notice is promptly given to the Chief Administrative Officer.
(B) Nothing in this section shall prohibit a former employee from entering into a contract to represent the city in any matter.
§ 3-3-6 CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.
No employee or former employee shall disclose or use confidential information acquired by virtue of his or her municipal employment or office without prior written approval of the Chief Administrative Officer. Nothing in this subsection shall prohibit a former employee from entering into a contract to represent the city in a confidential capacity.
§ 1-1-99 GENERAL PENALTY.
Any person who violates any provision of this code for which another penalty is not specifically provided shall, upon conviction, be subject to a fine not exceeding $500 or by imprisonment not exceeding 90 days or both unless a different specific penalty is provided. Each separate violation shall constitute a separate offense and, upon conviction, each day of violation shall constitute a separate offense.
The way we see this, Mr. Schultz has violated the ordinance at least 120 times....