Federal Judge Slams City; Chief Shultz Skates Again

The City of Albuquerque is left holding the bag again, thanks to the irresponsible actions of the City’s Nuisance Abatement Team. The team has several APD officers assigned to it as well as a few inspectors. The team was being overseen by Pete Dinelli who is an attorney and former City Councilor. According to the Journal report (see here), “A federal judge's ruling that the city has engaged in overzealous enforcement of its nuisance abatement ordinance — resulting in the eviction of some residents without a hearing beforehand.”

The City’s Nuisance Abatement Ordinance was one of the items that former Mayor Marty Chavez prided himself with.

According to the Journal, “U.S. District Judge James O. Browning found the city had failed to show sufficient evidence about whether the code violations in the challenged cases demonstrated an immediate danger to the lives and safety of the occupants — enough to turn people out of their homes without a warrant.”

According to the former City Attorney and now COA of Albuquerque, Rob Perry stated, "Really, what the problem is, oversight and supervision of this unit at the senior management levels was atrocious. ‘That's what permitted this to occur.’" Clearly Pete Dinelli was the Public Safety Director at the time and Ray Schultz was the Chief of Police. Dinelli is gone but Schultz is still here and costing the tax payers big bucks.

Interesting enough, “Perry defended the work of police and code enforcement officers, and said the high-profile evictions that generated headlines and TV coverage weren't necessarily sound policy. ‘Here's the reality: (They) weren't lawyers, but you know what? The former public safety director was, and the former mayor was. And they have to take a certain responsibility for the policies they implemented,’" he said.

Perry spoke condescending about Dinelli and Chavez, but not a word about one of the “Good Ol’ Boys” like Schultz, who is considered part of the City’s “senior management.” Why is Perry willing to shove Dinelli and Chavez under the bus and let Chief Schultz skate by on this one too? You will have to decide that question on your own.

Now Darren White is the Public Safety Director. It looks like the City of Albuquerque “jumped from the pan into the fire.” Way to go Berry.

The Suit was filed by Joe and Shannon Kennedy on behalf of Kevin Lowery and others, a class that they estimate includes roughly 200 individuals or families. The Eye is sure that the Kennedy's will be expecting a huge settlement which has become common when dealing with anything Schultz has his hand in.

The Eye On Albuquerque reported on the abatement team back in July of 2009. The Eye stated in the story, “If we are going to have a nuisance abatement unit, it better have strict procedures and be monitored closely for potential abuse (see here).” But apparently the City did not adhere to our warning then either.

Abating the Abaters

The City of Albuquerque has an aggressive policy designed to get rid of substandard properties and unruly businesses. The idea is to use city resources and departments to basically harass a business or property owner until they either clean up their act, close their doors, or sell the property. The city's nuisance abatement team is a combination of code inspectors and law enforcement working together to become a nuisance to the nuisance purveyors headed by Chief Public Safety Officer Pete Dinelli.

Back in April, the Journal reported that three detectives and two inspectors had been suspended for passing around a "distasteful montage of pictures." We know what immediately springs to mind - a bunch of photos ala Abu Grab.

"We are taking extremely aggressive action," said Albuquerque Chief Public Safety Officer Pete Dinelli, who directly oversees the Safe City Strike Force. "The alleged conduct was inappropriate and unprofessional, but in no way was it criminal."

Police officials said Dinelli was informed about the montage of pictures after a meeting Tuesday. Police officials would not discuss specifically what was in the photographs.

- ABQ Journal (Subscription)

The short story didn't really come to our attention until just recently when a different version of events reached us through our Eyes. Apparently, the Safe City Strike Force had a meeting back in April where the leader of the group Pete Dinelli instructed officers to obtain search warrants in every situation where they were conducting searches of "nuisance" properties.

That sounds right. Everyone who's ever watched a cop show knows that the police need a warrant to search a private property - unless of course the officers are invited in by someone who has the authority to allow a search - someone like a tenant.

In fact, the unit has always obtained search warrants in any case where they had not been allowed to search the premises by a party who had the authority to do so. In cases where an authorized party allowed a search, officers carried a form and only performed a search after obtaining the signature of an authorized party.

According to our Eyes, Dinelli wanted the unit to put the kibosh on the authorized but non-search warrant searches because it's an election year. Apparently, the Chief Public Safety Officer didn't have a problem with the searches until his boss' (and his) job is on the line.

Our Eyes tell us that the photo montage suspensions are just an excuse to let the officers know that they're to tow the line. More importantly, the Eyes have it that Dinelli knew about the photos which were of a card placed in a strategic location after a successful abatement.

Look, the whole nuisance abatement concept bothers us for many reasons - the most important of which is that it's far too easy for a unit designed to clean up crack houses and prosecute slum lords to be used to harass law abiding property owners. It can also be used to steal MILLIONS of dollars from motorists through red light scam-eras... but we digress.

If we're going to have a nuisance abatement unit, it better have strict procedures and be monitored closely for potential abuse. That being said, the process should not be determined by the calendar. More specifically, it should not be determined by whether or not The Almighty Alcalde is up for re-election (to his 4th term).

If the unit is operating effectively, within the law, and not being used to harass, bully, or blackmail property owners then its operation should not change simply because the boss is up for re-election. Abating the abaters for political purposes is an abuse of the system and just as wrong as misusing the city's nuisance abatement process to harass an innocent property owner.

Downtown Bars= Full Immunity, Isn't That Right Mayor Berry and Chief Schultz?

Chief's Overtime is a program that seems to benefit many. Theoretically, private businesses contract the Albuquerque Police Department to provide a security of sorts for their business or event. The business pays the City of Albuquerque $52.00 an hour for officers and even more for Sergeants and Lieutenants. The City obviously profits from this service, as it is well known that the Officers do not make near that amount. Some businesses, like Graham Central Station, rely on Chief's Overtime Officers to maintain a safe environment. In fact, the opening and continued operation of Graham Central Station was contingent on the employment of officers at their business.

Recently, the Chief of Police,Ray Schultz, ordered that ALL contracts with liquor establishments be immediately null and void and no longer honored. Scratch that, not ALL businesses, just those businesses that Chief Schultz ordered. For example, contracts with Tumbleweeds and Graham Central Station are no longer honored, however Chief's Overtime is still applied at all Lobo functions and Isotope games. For those unaware, all Lobo events and all Isotopes games sell alcohol.

Now for the really big twist; the Downtown district (a district famous for the large amount of bars in a relatively small area) is provided with FREE police service. By free, we mean the bars do not pay the city a SINGLE penny for the exclusive use of an entire police squad; sometimes more. For example, EVERY single Friday and Saturday at least one ENTIRE squad makes themselves unavailable for calls for service and is ordered to stay solely in the downtown district.

Is the crime downtown SO BAD that it needs ENTIRE squads to be there non stop during operational hours? The answer is simple, YES! One on Saturday (October 8, 2011), while the bars were open, ONE squad handled nine dispatched calls, ten on site calls, one misdemeanor arrest, ten separate disturbances, and four separate fights. One of the fights was so violent that the victim had to be transported to the hospital with a skull fracture. On August 26, 2011, there was one stabbing, one Fire Marshall call (overcrowding at the One-Up bar), a tasing call, four traffic stops, ten separate disturbances, three misdemeanor arrests, two investigations, one theft, one traffic problem, and eighteen on site actions. In fact, our Eyes tell us the Fire Marshall is dispatched EVERY week due to overcrowding.

This is just the tip of the iceberg, these are just two examples and the Eye has many more statistics involving downtown. With all of these problems, why is the City allowing the businesses to remain open? Why is the Criminal Nuisance Abatement Unit allowing these businesses to remain open when in fact, they violate the Nuisance Abatement Ordinance EVERY SINGLE WEEK?

According the the Ordinance, "A public nuisance shall include and is further defined as any parcel of real property, commercial or residential, that is the subject of or that has been involved with calls for service to any law enforcement agency(ies) for violations of the criminal statutes cited in § 11-1-1-3(A) defining public nuisance and shall include a repeated pattern of calls for service and complaints of vagrants, suspicious persons, suspicious cars, general calls for welfare checks, disorderly conduct, domestic violence, domestic altercations, domestic disputes, loud parties, loud music, neighborhood complaints, noise ordinance violations, and public drunkenness and shall be subjected to the imposition of penalties for public nuisance as provided by § 11-1-1-11 ROA 1994."

Chief Schultz and Mayor Berry have thrown a wool blanket over everyone's eyes. They are turning less violent businesses away, and are allowing VIOLATING businesses to thrive, and even provide FREE security. The city has once again discriminated against. By allowing this to continue, the city has shown a complete disregard for the safety of its officers and the safety of the public. Next time you make a call to 911 and the officers take a long time to respond, just have a peace of mind to know that they are probably taking a long time responding as they are too busy dealing the havoc, chaos, and violence of downtown. A havoc, chaos and violence that is not only condoned by the Chief of Police, but financially supported as well.


For the complete Nuisance Abatement Ordinance, click here.

Forfeiture

Last week the New Mexico Supreme Court threw out a challenge to Albuquerque's vehicle forfeiture ordinance because the challenger lacked legal standing (ABQ Journal - Subscription). The ordinance (O-05-113) sponsored by (thankfully) former City Councilor Craig Loy was passed by the council back in 2005, and allows police officers to seize a vehicle upon arrest of that vehicle's driver for driving under the influence of "drugs or intoxicating liquor." Upon passage it was immediately challenged by the ACLU.

(Sidebar)
We don't usually agree with the folks over at the American Civil Liberties Union. They're usually trying to strip someone of an explicit right or freedom in favor of their own interpretation of the code of political correctness. In this case, they actually took up for a right explicitly guaranteed by the Constitution and should be commended for their action. Doesn't mean we'll be joining any time soon, but we'll give credit where credit is due.
(End Sidebar)

Loy's forfeiture ordinance incorporates many of the quasi-legal proceedings that are found in many of the city's more detestable law/code enforcement gimmicks and is not surprisingly based on the concept of nuisance abatement. The idea is that if you run a red light, own a crack house, or now - thanks to the New Mexico Supremes - are accused of driving while intoxicated, your property is a nuisance and can be seized and sold with the profit going to the city.

Of course in an attempt to cover their... uh hind quarters, the ordinance provides for a semblance of due process through a provision for the vehicle owner to appeal the seizure and subsequent forfeiture order by appearing before one of Marty's Mini-Magistrates. Yep, the very same "hearing officers" we've all come to know and loath in the Red Light Scam-era proceedings.

In addition to appearing in the Almighty Alcalde's Kangaroo Court, these "hearings" are deemed "informal and not bound by the technical rules of evidence." Further, "the city hearing officer shall only determine whether the law enforcement officer had probable cause to seize the vehicle. (read the complete ordinance here)[emphasis added]"

PROBABLE CAUSE - A reasonable belief that a person has committed a crime. The test the court of appeals employs to determine whether probable cause existed for purposes of arrest is whether facts and circumstances within the officer's knowledge are sufficient to warrant a prudent person to believe a suspect has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime. U.S. v. Puerta, 982 F.2d 1297, 1300 (9th Cir. 1992). In terms of seizure of items, probable cause merely requires that the facts available to the officer warrants a "man of reasonable caution" to conclude that certain items may be contraband or stolen property or useful as evidence of a crime. U.S. v. Dunn, 946 F.2d 615, 619 (9th Cir. 1991), cert. Denied, 112 S. Ct. 401 (1992).

- Lectlaw.com

In other words, an officer can impose punishment (there's no other way to look at loosing thousands of dollars through a vehicle forfeiture) simply because a "prudent person" would believe that a "suspect has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime." This is precisely the type of limitless governmental power that the framers of the Constitution were worried about.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. [emphasis added]

- The 5th Amendment to the Constitution

You might want to read the italicized portion again... "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." The Constitution doesn't give an exception for nuisance abatement or driving under the influence. Put simply, punishment cannot be meted out by government until after you are found guilty of an offense - until after you receive due process. It's simply laughable to believe that at the time of an arrest the accused has received any form of due process worthy of the name.

For those of you who were worried about providing access to U.S. Courts to unlawful combatants (a.k.a. terrorists) held in Guantanamo (who were not afforded the protection of our Constitution before their capture and certainly wouldn't extend similar protections to anyone under any circumstances), our city has passed an ordinance that deprives the accused of property upon issuance of an official accusation. Hell, under this ordinance it's not even important whether you're guilty or innocent. All that's required for you to be deprived of your vehicle - for you to receive punishment - is for an officer to have probable cause to accuse you!

(Sidebar)
There's also an argument that the City of Albuquerque doesn't have the authority to seize anything valued over $1,000. New Mexico Statute 3-17-1 limits convictions under a municipal code for DWI to not more than $1,000 and/or 364 days in jail (read it here). These days, even the most heinous junker is worth a thousand bucks. As a result, forfeiture of most vehicles would exceed the maximum penalty allowed under state law.
(End Sidebar)

Granted, DWI is a serious problem in this state. However, it's hard to justify denying a fundamental and explicit Constitutional right even when addressing a serious problem. If the city wants to book the vehicle into evidence and return the vehicle to the owner upon a finding of not guilty or a case dismissal... fine, as long as the city bears the cost of storage and liability for damage. Stopping DWI should not come at the price of the forfeiture of our guaranteed Constitutional rights.

----- Post Script-----
Just in case we weren't clear above, we have no problem with the seizure of property for evidentiary purposes. What we have a problem with is forfeiture prior to adjudication. An administrative hearing officer cannot be considered impartial as he/she is employed by the executive branch of government. The hearing process is not bound to the rules of evidence and a hearing only determines probable cause not guilt or innocence.

Comparing seizing a vehicle to the seizure of illegal substances is an invalid comparison because in most cases the property in question was legally obtained and is in all cases legal to possess. Law enforcement regularly seize property associated with criminal investigations. Property is returned to its rightful owner following adjudication except in the case of illegal substances which are destroyed or upon conviction whereupon seized property is routinely deemed forfeit.

There's absolutely no justification for a misdemeanor offense to circumvent the Fifth Amendment. Property involved in DWI cases should be treated exactly like evidence from any other crime.

"SUBSTANDARD" Policing; Thanks Ray-Ray (1.7 Million Tax dollars lost)

During the Vietnam War, after missions where VietCong or NVA regular troops were killed, American soldiers occasionally left calling cards—death cards as they became known—to remind the enemy who they were fighting against. The Ace of Spades was this card and as such it is identified as the card of winter and thus known as the “death card.” To the Vietnamese, the icon of the spade held significant meaning and was itself a bad omen. Lately, this card represents a bad omen to the taxpayers of Albuquerque.

On July 6, 2009, the Eye broke a story about detectives of APD’s Criminal Nuisance Abatement Unit leaving the so-called death card at properties where they removed occupants and condemned the building as uninhabitable. Talk also focused on detectives taking pictures of themselves while boastfully standing over recently arrested or evicted persons while brandishing their rifles like Mexican narco-terrorists. The unit sought to inspire fear and intimidation as part of their, let’s be honest, largely administrative activities. Since then, the failures of this unit continued unabated and this past week CAO Rob Perry announced a settlement with the lawyer representing the plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit for almost $2 Million. Our Eyes tell us this lawsuit was filed in 2009 shortly after the revelations broke about the misconduct of the detectives in the CNAU. Mr. Perry and Mayor Berry were quick to state that this was a problem they inherited from the previous administration. We think that’s a weak statement given that the Berry administration endorsed the continued operations of the Safe City Strike Force since Berry’s election almost 2 ½ years ago. We also think it’s a ridiculous statement since these activities started and continued under the direction of APD Chief Ray Schultz—who apparently is still the chief of police.

Which leads us to questions we raised back in 2009: What were these detectives thinking? Either they indeed view their actions analogous with armed combat with an enemy in a war zone OR they are mocking the very activity they are engaged in. Either way, such conduct is an insult to every real officer who puts on a badge and gun and seriously takes their oath to serve and protect. Is it not enough to remove somebody from their dwelling that you have to “spike the football” by leaving a card that reinforces intimidation and fear. Our Eyes tell us not only did they leave cards as in the above pictures, but they posted them on walls with knives as well.

Chief Schultz will of course continue to publically assert his ignorance and that he knew nothing about it. But anybody who works with or knows Schultz concedes he is a consummate control-freak and to suggest he doesn’t know what’s going on in his department is not dealing with reality. How many previous chief’s had an MDT on their desktop? How many previous chiefs routinely use the Internal Affairs and Criminal Intelligence units to do specific tasks directed by the 5th floor? We are told the activities by these detectives, and worse, are among the reasons why the city settled this case. With the US Department of Justice evaluating whether or not there’s a pattern and practice of civil rights abuses by APD, the Mayor is doing everything he can to avoid such an investigation. As such it seems the Mayor (or CAO Rob Perry since we are told he’s the one that actually runs the city) will put his political interests before the interests of the taxpayers. This shouldn’t surprise us.

In Covey’s “Speed of Trust,” heavy emphasis is placed on Practicing Accountability. Great leaders build trust by first holding themselves accountable for bad results. They don’t blame others. This noble principle is something that, sadly, is without precedent in the leadership of APD or the City of Albuquerque. Chief Schultz and Mayor Berry are more interested in spiking the football to thwart any objective and independent review of the APD. They have spiked this football by unjustly terminating officers (all of whom seem to be winning their jobs back as of late), ignoring critical calls, disregarding misconduct by deputy chiefs, and dangerous events in particular and creating a general climate of distrust, fear, and intimidation in general. Do we see or hear any statements accepting personal accountability by Chief Schultz?

P.S. Our Eyes also tell us Mayor Berry is out of town in New York trying to bolster the city’s bond ratings which have continued to fall from AAA and Wall Street has given the city a “Negative Outlook.” How’s that for spiking the football?

P.P.S. We are also still trying to figure out why the APOA would attack the four city counselors who have been staunch advocates of the officers and their battles against the administration and why the APOA leadership would DEFEND APD’s leadership when they have failed the officers time and time again……


We are surprised Schultz didn't order the detectives to leave his calling card of a swastika; same difference right...

Bluff?

It's been quite a while since we talked about Marty's Scam-eras. Since that time, the tireless mechanized shutterbugs have been snapping away at Albuquerque drivers. Sunday night, KOAT reported that the scam was owed some $8 MILLION because it seems that according to the city some 25% of drivers are either ignoring the tainted tickets or aren't receiving them in the first place.

City Attorney Bob White told KOAT that the "tickets" will be turned over to a collection agency and that failure to pay would result in potential harm to the owner of the vehicle's credit rating. Remember, scam-era citations are sent to the owner of the vehicle not to the driver of the vehicle - seemingly under the theory that you are your Chrysler's keeper.

Understand that the scam has been running since 2005. Over the past 5 years 25% of drivers have simply ignored the shutterbug citations leading to $8 MILLION in unpaid fines. While the city claims that unpaid citations are sent for collection - and they may be - we have yet to hear of a case where a collection agency has sued on behalf of the city in order to collect an unpaid scam-era fine.

You see... the city and any collection agency have a number of a problems when it comes to collection of fines alleged by scam-eras - not the least of which is proving that the violation ever happened. The debt alleged by the city has never been acknowledged by the owner of the vehicle or proven by the city in court - even to the lower civil standard of preponderance of the evidence. The owner of the vehicle has not contractually agreed to pay the fine and there is no civil version of implied consent. There's not even any proof that the owner of the unruly vehicle received notification. In short, the city doesn't have a case.

Just try taking your neighbor to court over an unpaid debt without any proof whatsoever that your neighbor ever borrowed your money or even knew about the debt in the first place. That's the predicament that the city finds itself in when vehicle owners don't respond to the citations.

There are also a number constitutional questions regarding the constitutionality of underlying nuisance abatement ordinance - the ordinance upon which the scam-era program is built. But suffice it to say, the city's enforcement of scam-era citations has relied on voluntary compliance and the threat of attacking someone's credit rating.

We all live in fear of some miscreant stealing our identity and ruining our credit. Restoring one's credit takes an inordinate amount of time and can prevent us from obtaining credit to buy a home or a car, and can even prevent someone from getting a job.

Just imagine the liability of the agency that attacks your credit rating on behalf of the City of Albuquerque based on a claim of an outstanding debt with no supporting adjudication or shred of evidence that the accused received notification of said debt. If someone was prevented from getting a job because of an action alleging an unverified or adjudicated debt, exactly how much would a jury award the victim?

Sunday night's story on KOAT just smells bad. Our Eyes tell us that while overall the number of scam-era unpaid scam-era citations is 25%, the current number is around 33%. That means that the number of people voluntarily paying citations is decreasing. Further, our Eyes tell us that most of the scam-era revenue comes not from red light violations but from green light speeding violations.

[Sidebar]
Our Eyes also tell us that falling revenue from scam-era intersections has become problem. As a result, The 5th Floor has lowered the triggering speed from 10 mph over the posted speed limit to 4 mph over the posted speed limit. Remember, this is supposed to be about public safety.
[End Sidebar]

The scam-era system has been built on the false premise of law enforcement and fueled by the voluntary cooperation of the general public. In our opinion, The 5th Floor was using KOAT in an effort to scare the public into voluntary compliance knowing full well that their scam can't stand. In other words, it looked a lot like a bluff.

Decriminalized and Dismissed

We've all complained about an abundance of handicapped spaces standing empty when faced with a packed parking lot. We're also pretty sure that anyone who relies on handicapped parking would gladly trade places with those in the far reaches of the parking lot if they could just have their mobility back.

Last September the council created a new ordinance that among other things, increased fines for those who decided to take the short walk away from those who really need it. The ordinance (O-07-65) requested by the mayor and sponsored by The Mayer, took the nuisance abatement route. If that sounds familiar it should - it's the same flawed premise that Marty's scam-eras are based upon.

In fact, the procedural mechanism seems to match the scam-era process almost exactly. The only substantive difference between the two is that the handicapped program didn't come with expensive cameras and a billing infrastructure - which as it turns out is the problem.

According to our Eyes down at Metro Court Chief Judge Judy Nakamura sent out a memo instructing Metro Court judges to dismiss tickets issued to handicapped parking violators. The Eyes have it that Judge Nakamura's memo claims that since the new ordinance passed Metro Court doesn't have jurisdiction over the citations which are directed to be heard by one of the city's tax collectors... uh, hearing officers.

It seems that while the ordinance specifies a procedure it didn't create the infrastructure necessary to issue the civil citations. What's more interesting is that apparently the civil process has supplanted the criminal one.

Decriminalizing handicapped parking violations was an attempt to increase the fines violators paid with the added benefit that the city and by extension the mayor and council got to keep the money. The result of Marty and Councilor Mayer's tinkering in misdemeanor criminal law is that no one is paying anything - decriminalized and dismissed.

Courage, Fire and Fantasia

At times we are very critical of APD's 5th Floor and occasionally individual officers who screw up or betray the public's trust. But by and large, the officers whose job it is to protect and serve do so with courage and honor that is rarely acknowledged publicly.

You may have already read about the APD pursuit that ended in a fiery crash early Saturday morning (ABQ Journal - Subscription). Officers were called to the Fantasia night club early Saturday morning reference a disturbance where an elderly man had been beaten. Upon arrival, officers observed an orange and white GMC Sierra pickup leaving the scene.

Officers issued an attempt to locate on the vehicle but moments later the orange and white pickup returned and tried to hit an officer at the scene. The officer managed to get out of the way but the truck proceeded to run down a woman in the parking lot. Officers believe that the driver of the pickup intended to hit the woman because it turned around and hit her a second time.

The truck then left the lot at a high rate of speed and headed west on McLeod to Jefferson running lights and almost hitting other vehicles along the way. A short time later the pickup was spotted turning onto the southbound I-25 on ramp by Officer Dawn Roberto. A pursuit was authorized and officer Roberto gave chase.

Officer Roberto pursed the truck through the Big-I where it nearly flew off the flyover to the sixth street exit where the driver of the orange and white truck was unable to negotiate a left hand turn striking the bridge and bursting into flames.

This is where the extraordinary courage of ordinary officers came into play as pursuers became life savers. Despite the fact that moments before this same truck had tried to kill one of their own and had run down an innocent woman, officers on the scene risked their lives battling the fire in the engine compartment to save the lives of the driver and his passenger. While waiting on AFD to arrive the officers emptied five of their fire extinguishers in the engine compartment to no avail.

Our Eyes tell us that the driver's side door was collapsed and the truck was in a position that made it impossible to access the cab directly. However, an officer noticed movement from the passenger and despite the height of the vehicle, and the fire beginning to enter the cab, Officers Zachary Floyd, Chris Romero, and Isaac Maes managed to pull the passenger - a 16 year old that reeked of alcohol - from the burning vehicle.

As it turns out both the driver and the passenger carried Mexican national IDs. Our Eyes tell us that they suspect the two are (or were as the case may be) in this country illegally and could be involved in illegal activity (other than being here illegally in the first place) because they were both carrying large amounts of cash.

Which brings us back to Fantasia... Our Eyes tell us that the club - an all ages night club - is suspected of catering to illegals and of turning a blind eye to shall we say, recreational pharmaceuticals. According to our Eyes the reputation of the club had been known for some time in law enforcement circles, but every time they attempted nuisance abatement or enforcement action they were shut down. Our Eyes believe that the club was being protected because politicians didn't want to look like they were targeting a club that caters to Mexican nationals. Some even speculate that the club was receiving political cover from Santa Fe.

In early August, another well known all ages night club - Club 7 - was raided by BCSO and APD (ABQ Journal - Subscription). Our Eyes tell us that this is another case where APD had been shut down because The Almighty Alcalde didn't want a black mark on downtown. In other words, the perception that downtown is a safe fun atmosphere is more important than underage drinking, rampant drug use, and fire code violations that could have ended over 500 young lives.

It's interesting that in politics perception is reality even if the reality is that with a little investigation lives could be saved. Unfortunately, politicians rarely show the courage demonstrated by officers on a daily basis. They're generally more interested in not looking bad than in not being bad. Even when they know that operations like Fantasia and Club 7 are endangering lives, they'll look the other way as long as the media doesn't pick it up.

It really is too bad that we don't have more politicians like officers Floyd, Romero, and Maes who when faced with a choice between what is right and what is easy, have the courage to risk their own lives to save another who just moments before was their adversary.

Downtown Gets Special Treatment, Despite The Violence!

Yet again, downtown Albuquerque is receiving special treatment and special police services, despite the large violent problems that plague the downtown area. If downtown Albuquerque was like any other Albuquerque business, the Criminal Nuisance Abatement Unit (CNAU) would have it shut down! The Eye did a story on November 16, 2011 that explained how it appeared as if the downtown area was receiving a "full immunity" from all of its criminal behavior. It seems as if the New Years Holiday is no exception to this immunity clause.
On December 23, 2011, an email from Karen Salazar, reiterating that field lieutenants are to be forced off "per dept memorandum 11-140". Ms. Salazar even stated that a few lieutenants have stated that they were required to work the holiday, even though it was in direct contradiction to the department memorandum.
Our eyes tell us the Valley Area Command Lieutenant (specifically graveyard) was forced to work overtime on New Years, solely for the the purpose of combatting the downtown area and the violence that was predicted to occur.
Low and behold, those predictions came true. There was at least one shooting (leaving two people shot) and one stabbing. This is on top of all of the other altercations and disturbances in the downtown area. This leads to many questions: What makes the downtown area so special? Why does the downtown area get special treatment and obviouse police presence at a cost to the city? Are all Albuquerque liquor establishments provided with the same treatment? Why aren't the downtown businesses required to hire chief's overtime officers as every other businesses are told to do? In fact, Graham Central Station (a local nightclub in the Northeast Heights) was threatened with a "hire chief's overtime or close" option.
As our story on November 16th indicated, this unfortunately is not an isolated incident. The downtown area has violent incidents every single week. What is keeping CNAU from issuing all of the businesses downtown with a notice to seize the violent behavior or be forced to close?
It seems like yet again, Mayor Berry and Chief Ray Schultz are discriminating against all of the other Albuquerque buisnesses while catering to those that are most violent and most dangerous to the citizens of Albuquerque.
Check out one of the stories that KOBTV covered regarding the New Years shooting by clicking here.

Upside Down and Backwards

Tuesday's Albuquerque Journal featured an editorial penned by the Journal’s editorial board that chastised the Governor, the Legislature, and the Almighty Alcalde himself for their actions regarding Albuquerque’s red light scam-era program. Their apparent position is that the Legislature is trying to grab the money, the mayor has pulled the plug too quickly and Governor Richardson is simply playing politics because he vetoed a similar measure last year (ABQ Journal – Subscription).

The whole editorial is based on the assumption that the program is fair and working to reduce accidents at scam-era enforced intersections. Despite numerous attempts to cook the books, countless news conferences, and even a Task Farce report, the city has not provided one shred of evidence that the scam-eras have been working in the interests of public safety. The only thing that the scam-eras have demonstrated is an unblinking ability to fill the city's coffers with "excess revenue."

To be fair, The Journal’s editorial board has long been supportive of Marty and his scam. They have repeatedly (and we believe intentionally) overlooked some of the very real problems with mercenary style law enforcement as a replacement for live police officers whose only motivation is enforcing the laws that they have sworn to uphold. To make matters worse the STOP program based on nuisance abatement ,deprives defendants of their right to a fair and impartial hearing.

We have never been able to understand why many in our society are so quick to defend the rights of convicted murderers and terrorists yet fail to fight for the common everyday rights of their fellow citizens. The scam-era program is a perfect example of how we’ve got everything upside down and backwards.

It’s the everyday rights of ordinary people that are being relentlessly stripped away not the rights of murderers and terrorists. The STOP program is a perfect illustration of how the Constitution is being shredded for the claimed benefit of “public safety.” Even if claims of accident reductions are true (which there has been no conclusive evidence to support), the system of “justice” created by the STOP ordinance strips the accused of their rights as fast as a scam-era can snap a photo.

It all starts with that first flash. More often than not, drivers are unaware of a "violation." The first clue that a motorist may have violated the administrative law created by the city is the “citation” they receive in the mail some ten days after the fact. Ask yourself, can you remember where you drove ten days ago and if you can the specifics of any particular intersection?

It’s our contention that most drivers cannot remember the alleged offense and as a result are not only deprived of the ability to gather evidence in their defense but are even deprived of the ability to accurately and truthfully testify in their own defense.

To further aggravate the problem, Redflex receives a bounty for each citation issued. That’s little different than hiring someone off the street to write down license plate numbers at intersections and paying them per vehicle. There’s a direct incentive to deprive the accused of their right to a fair trial by delaying notification and forcing the accused to rely on the accuser’s evidence for their defense.

When the citation is contested, the recipient is forced to go before an administrative hearing officer whose primary objective is the same as the accuser’s – to find the accused guilty. If you have any doubt about the veracity of that statement, why does the city continue to prosecute “violations” even when they know that there is a high probability that many of the citations issued over a particular time period, were in fact issued in error. The drivers who failed to contest their citations were simply "convicted" and their money taken illegally.

Unlike criminal allegations, if you wish to appeal an administrative decision the burden of appeal rests with the accused who is in essence, required to sue the city in District Court in order to get their money back. When you study the process, it doesn’t take long to realize that the burden of proof lies squarely with the accused.

Tuesday's Journal editorial continually disregards the most offensive components of the scam-era system consistently defending the indefensible.

Governor Richardson needs to sign SB442 not to pay for courts, but to make sure that criminal violations of New Mexico’s traffic law end up there. Marty needs to leave the program’s suspension in place not because he’s trying to out-maneuver the governor, but because his golden goose has been revealed to the pig it really is.

More importantly, it’s long past the time to right our concept of justice by placing the emphasis on everyday rights and freedoms. If we are courageous enough to protect our everyday rights and those of our fellow citizens, then we will be protecting the rights of those who are accused of far more serious crimes while simultaneously protecting the rights of their victims. Otherwise we will remain upside down and backwards, frittering away our daily liberty for the promise of security while letting murderers and terrorists walk freely among us.

----- Update -----
We originally identified the Legislature's raid on Albuquerque's traffic scam as SB422. The correct bill is SB 442. Thanks to a reader with a sharp "eye" we have corrected the error above.

You Know the City's Out Of Control When...

We couldn't believe our eyes, so we had to read it two or three times... Eric Griego, comedian, former councilor and candidate for mayor in 2005 is calling Albuquerque Nanny Town! (ABQ Tribune) Yep, that Eric Griego!

Eric is not what we would call a limited government type, so when he starts wondering "if local leaders are getting just a little too eager to tackle problems that are best left to citizens to work out for themselves," something is REALLY wrong.

From cameras to animal husbandry, the Mayor and this City Council have decided that they know what's best for you. They seem to believe that they have all of the answers and all of the good ideas... low flow toilets, cell phone bans, types of water dishes, trolleys, arenas, limiting public comment... where will it end and how far will they insert themselves into our lives?

"Thinking of cruising Downtown? Better not, or you'll be fined. Forgot to fix your dog? Better get a loan. Too many cars parked in your driveway? Better give them away or have them towed. Shady activity going on at your local pub? Not to worry: The nuisance abatement team, aka the Safe Cities Strikeforce, will take Õm down.

Sarcasm aside, there are many great local ordinances that make Albuquerque safer and cleaner for us all. However, I can't help but wonder if we shouldn't limit the number of new ordinances in a year to maybe a few hundred." (ABQ Tribune)

Freedom isn't free and it's also becoming a much rarer commodity in our fair city, so much so that even those who favor activist government are concerned about its intervention in our lives. It's something we should all be concerned about. Nanny Town indeed!

Scam-era Misinformation

A couple of weeks ago, the New Mexico Transportation Commission ordered the City of Albuquerque and every other scam-era city to shut down the scam and remove the scam-eras on state roads. Tuesday, the Albuquerque Journal reported Mayor Berry's response.

"It is my understanding that the state does very little in the area of traffic enforcement along these roadways ... ," Mayor Richard Berry wrote to Transportation Secretary Gary Girón on Friday. "Therefore, given the (state Transportation) commission's recent decision to adopt a policy directly affecting the safety and enforcement of traffic laws within the city of Albuquerque, I would like to discuss with you a potential plan for the State Police to assume additional responsibilities for the safety and enforcement of these roads."

- ABQ Journal (Subscription)

 Actually Mayor Berry, the Albuquerque Police Department does very little in the area of traffic law enforcement on any of the 20 intersections where scam-eras are present. In point of fact, scam-eras themselves don't enforce traffic law as a criminal violation but rather alleged violations by a vehicle of the city's civil code.


The city's STOP program is based on civil nuisance abatement. Citations issued by Redflex on behalf of the city are not - repeat NOT - criminal citations. Despite that very inconvenient fact, Mayor Berry, Public Safety Director, Darren White, and Chief, Ray Schultz are intentionally mixing criminal law enforcement with civil code enforcement by asking for the State Police as a replacement for the state road scam-eras.

Look... there has been no independently verified data that proves the scam-eras increase public safety. What we have seen is repeated attempts by the city, APD, and Chief Ray Schultz (read it here, here and here) to sell the program as a form of law enforcement and public safety. In fact, the only independent data provided by the PRC at the request of Bernalillo County Commissioner Michael Brasher indicated that accidents had initially increased at a number of intersections (view the data here).

[Sidebar]
In an odd bit of irony, the 2007 story that exposed the initial lie... uh, exaggerations of APD's public safety claims was written by none other than APD's current Public Information Officer, T.J. Wilham. You can read the Journal story here (subscription).
[End Sidebar]

Unfortunately Berry's response to Transportation Secretary, Gary Giron sounds an awful lot like a letter that would have been penned by the Formerly Almighty Alcalde. It's a mixture of misinformation and mischaracterization aimed at making the public think that somehow scam-eras make them safer despite any proof.

Worse... Mayor Berry is defending a program that is supposedly under review by the University of New Mexico. This staunch defense of the STOP program during the study makes it look as if the study's outcome is a foregone conclusion and that the new mayor same as the old mayor intends to keep the scam-eras. Despite a new lead singer, the city's still singin' the same old tune. What a shame.

Where's "Two-Face" Schultz?

It’s become all too obvious that when there are controversies challenging APD policies and directives initiated by Chief Schultz, he’s seldom to be found to address those issues as, well, chief. In recent days, stories and allegations have surfaced regarding possible overpayment of retention bonuses to senior officers (our Eyes tell us that it is all but impossible to find any officers who has more than 19 years of experience within APD as so many are retiring as soon as possible). Our Eyes tell us these amounts are in excess of $500,000. Did Schultz receive this bonus? Where’s Schultz? Then there was a recent SWAT call-out where upon its initiation there was an officer involved shooting. This primary detail was omitted in APD’s press releases concerning the incident. Where’s Schultz? In the aftermath of the virtual destruction of the house SWAT softened and made entry on, APD and the City through its Criminal Nuisance Abatement Unit employed pressure upon the elderly owners to repair the house or face fines and penalties. Where’s Schultz? Over a year ago, there was the “Bringing Albuquerque Home” campaign to spend sparse public funds to survey and assist Albuquerque’s sizable homeless population to find residency. Now, APD promotes the arrest of homeless throughout the San Mateo and Downtown corridors. When asked about the sudden reversal in policy…again, Where’s Schultz?

However, we do notice when it comes time to lay blame on others or to boost himself, Chief Schultz cannot get in front of the cameras fast enough. In just a few weeks, one of Chief Schultz most public and controversial incidents will conclude. This case is the labor hearing involving former officer John Doyle. If you recall, Mr. Doyle was terminated by Chief Schultz (no DCOP Banks, it’s not the city of Albuquerque who terminated him) after a seemingly endless, and multiple, internal investigation stemming from Mr. Doyle and Mr. Woolever’s arrest of wanted violent fleeing felon, Nicholas Blume.

Initially, Chief Schultz said the force used by Mr. Doyle and Mr. Woolever was “of great concern.” Despite the fact that a chain of command of some of his most experienced officers had confirmed Mr. Doyle’s use of force as necessary, that it was consistent with training provided by APD’s police academy and it’s SOPs. While disturbing to the casual, and uninformed observer (and apparently the editors at the Albuquerque Journal), instead of backing his officers in their arrest of an armed, violent, resisting, and wanted felon, Chief Schultz “…immediately ordered a criminal investigation.” In the hours following Mr. Doyle’s final meeting with the chief, Chief Schultz grandstanded his termination of two officers who had apprehended one of APD’s most sought felons with minimal harm and under more dangerous circumstances where other officers have shot suspects. But knowing this, Chief Schultz oddly asserted it wasn’t what the officers did that led to their termination, it was what they didn’t do: search the subject. “The last thing they should do is turn their backs on the suspect,” Chief Schultz boasted to the Jeff Proctor of the Journal. We wonder if Chief Schultz watched the same video as everybody else? Prior to Mr. Woolever even getting his handcuffs out and on Blume, Doyle immediately stops his use of force. This cessation of force shows Mr. Doyle was in complete control and had a focused effort to do one thing: Assist Mr. Woolever in getting Blume in custody. Mr. Woolever then bolts from Blume and bends over in distress. At this point Mr. Doyle goes to check on his partner who appears winded from the experience of fighting with Blume. Mr. Doyle continues to check on his partner and then pats him on the back which somehow gets grotesquely twisted and promoted as a “belly-bump.” Mr. Doyle then goes back to Blume.

Chief Schultz apparently forgot there is one occasion when you leave a suspect, and that is to render aid. In other words, that is to provide back up to your partner or a citizen in distress instead of remaining focused on a suspect. But the irony of all of this is that it was Mr. Doyle who obtained the video from the hotel’s surveillance system. It was Mr. Doyle who agreed to waive his constitutional rights in order to be transparent during the criminal investigation. Incidentally, it wasn’t APD’s Violent Crimes Unit that did the investigation, it was Sgt. Ryan Buckner from APD’s Intelligence Unit who had promoted the apprehension and violent nature of Blume in the first place.

However, as much as Chief Schultz wants to omit and forget things that reveal his role and his awareness of this and all of the other controversial events facing APD, one cannot dispute this fact. Chief Schultz knew about how badly Sgt. Buckner wanted to catch Blume, he knew Blume’s history, and in fact he congratulated Mr. Doyle and Mr. Woolever’s efforts as the memo below reveals.

How does Chief Schultz transgress from telling the officers, "Great Work" to "You're Fired!" Is Shultz acting "two-faced" or is this a political act?

Mr. Doyle’s labor hearing commences August 1 at the city’s administration hearing office (the old SID building on Randolph SE). Any and all officers are encouraged to attend this public hearing in support of two officers who did the right thing when it needed to be done.