More Fuzzy Math for our Furry Friends

Apparently, we're not the only ones being treated to suspicious numbers from Albuquerque's Animal Control, Care, Welfare - whatever. According to the Albuquerque Journal the Alliance for Albuquerque Animals has been receiving statistics from Animal Control that don't jive with the numbers being fed the media.

A nonprofit advocacy group apparently received bad information from Albuquerque's animal shelters in response to public-information requests.

Debbra Colman, founder of the Alliance for Albuquerque Animals, said she believes the misinformation was deliberate.

"I'm profoundly disturbed that for three years the Alliance has been given false information," she said. "It just doesn't make any sense that the reports could have inadvertently been wrong rather than deliberately falsified."

-ABQ Journal (Subscription)

We wouldn't expect the city to cop to playing with numbers so as expected Chief Operating Officer, Ed Adams turned on the spin cycle.

Ed Adams, the city's chief operating officer, said a question about the accuracy of reports is part of the reason the mayor shook up the animal program last year. Mayor Martin Chávez last fall brought in new leadership for the shelters and made the program a stand-alone department in city government, meaning it reports directly to his office.

The bad formulas were developed before Patterson took over, Adams said.

-ABQ Journal (Subscription)

Yeaaaah... that's it! That's the reason the "mayor shook up the animal program last year"... bad formulas... that's the ticket! Now with Marty's new regime in place everything is above board and they've "got nothing to hide."

It appears that Director, Patterson's "nothing to hide" assertion isn't strictly true as we've received more evidence that the Journal story from Christmas Eve sounded better than it really was. The story by Journal reporter Jack King claimed that the Home 4 the Holidays adopt-a-thon left "Albuquerque's east- and west-side shelters [with] no animals available for adoption— all found homes at a weekend event."

Our Eyes tell us that the adopt-a-thon was held December 21st through the 23rd and that a few days after the event 67 dogs and 55 cats were still available before December 24th.

-Eye On Albuquerque

Today we received numbers from the Alliance for Albuquerque's Animals that shows that as of December 26th three days after the event, there were 41 cats and 87 dogs still available for adoption. The review date included suggests that all of these animals were available at the time of the Home 4 the Holidays event.

(Sidebar)
We're not suggesting that the Watermelon Mountain Ranch knew anything about the numbers being touted by the city. In fact, we don't want to do anything to discourage volunteerism at our city-owned shelters. However, we do believe that the city has both a legal and ethical obligation to tell us the truth about their successes and their failures.
(End Sidebar)

We've posted our latest information here. As you can see this report shows the impound number, review date, sex, spade or neuter status, animal evaluation, breed; and is broken out in to cats and dogs available in either the East or West side shelters on 12/26/07. While it's true that these numbers don't exactly match the ones we previously reported, they are close enough and they bear out that indeed there were animals available for adoption after the adopt-a-thon.

We really don't understand the administration's need to overstate the success of an event that had by all accounts been a tremendous success without having to inflate the figures. Kudos to the Watermelon Mountain Ranch folks and everyone who worked their tails off to place animals in good homes; they deserve better than fuzzy math for our furry friends.

Marty's Task Farce Reports

The day we've all been waiting for came today as Marty's task farce on the red light scam-eras reported in on-time and on-message. We know that you were as surprised as we were to find that the task farce endorsed the scam. Come on... did anyone really believe that they'd decide otherwise?

Marty's marketing group after "studying" the city's scam-era program for a little over 2 months came up with a whopping 13 page report (read it here). (Ok... so the thing's really 81 pages, but the other 78 pages are attachments and the cover page.) In essence the report contains the following recommendations:

• Lowering fines for a first offense fines from $100 to $69, the cost of a ticket and fees issued by an officer for running a red light.

• Creating an option for low-income violators to pay in installments.

• Keeping fines the same for repeat offenses.

• Conducting regular independent reviews of the program.

• Directing revenues from the program to traffic safety and to educating the public about the program. A reserve should be kept, as the task force anticipated lower revenues from the cameras as people change their driving behavior.

• Renegotiating the contract with Red Flex, the company that runs the cameras, so the company is not paid a percentage of fines. Under the current system, the company is paid through fixed fees, as well as a portion based on citations and fines issued.

• Conducting an immediate assessment of the hearing process for people who dispute the tickets, along with periodic reviews.

• Reviewing the placement of the cameras. Although most of the cameras were placed at the city's most dangerous intersections, some intersections have produced low numbers of violations.

The cameras at Montgomery and Carlisle boulevards Northeast produce about 25 percent of the program's total violations.

• Creating technical standards for where to place the cameras, which would determine all future decisions to install or remove cameras.

-ABQ Tribune

You'll notice if you read the report, that there are a couple of objectives that the "Blue Ribbon Study Group on Automated Enforcement" failed to achieve; the most important of which was to determine whether or not scam-era "protected" intersections reduce accidents. Despite the fact that the system has been in operation in some parts of the city for over two years, the task force reports that "[w]hen the STOP program was implemented, a protocol was not in place to evaluate its effectiveness in preventing crashes and deterring violations at automated intersections."

As a result, every time the city has made the claim that accidents have decreased at scam-era intersections you can't take them at their word because they simply DO NOT KNOW. Their numbers are simply more examples of Marty's greenhouse gas at Environmental Health, fuzzy math at Animal Control, or the number of officers at APD.

Another important omission is the overall legality of the program with respect to the authority of the city to implement a parallel legal system that supersedes both municipal and state law, and the question of due process with respect to the inherent conflict of interest of the program's hearing officers.

Both of these questions are raised in at least one of the class action lawsuits that are currently on file in District Court. The arguments against the city, the mayor, and Redflex are in our opinion compelling at the very least. (We have posted the most recent filing by attorney Paul Livingston here.)

Yet another un-addressed concern is the lack of verifiable calibration involved particularly in the case of the fixed scam-era speed detection units. Exhibit 11.1 attempts to convince readers that because the system has 4 sensors and two magnetic loops used to calculate speed they couldn't possibly malfunction. As you've seen right here on this website, the system does malfunction and there's almost no way for a defendant to prove a system malfunction.

Marty's Task Farce was as flawed as the system itself. It proceeded from the same assumption that the scam-era hearings do - namely that the scam-eras are infallible and therefore you are guilty until you prove otherwise. In this case, the program should continue because the numbers provided by the city and APD don't disprove that the system works.

(Sidebar)
We'd remind you here that a PRC analysis of the raw crash data provided by APD found that accidents didn't decrease and at some intersections actually increased (ABQ Journal - Subscription).
(End Sidebar)

In the final analysis, The Mayor's Blue Ribbon Study Group on Automated Enforcement was created by the mayor and produced a result that was as predictable as it was flawed. It's the old GIGO (Garbage In Garbage Out) theory in action. Insert faulty data on one side and get faulty conclusions on the other.

But don't worry; we're all just probably suffering from a case of "misconception." We don't really understand how the system works. We just need a bunch of billboards, TV ads, websites, bumper stickers, and a spokesperson or two. (Where is Trish Hoffman when you need her?)

Our concerns of due process, legality, accuracy, fairness - aren't really concerns at all. We're all guilty and apparently stupid, so pay your fine and shut your mouth because Marty's going to keep all of us sheep safe.

Fuzzy Math

We've seen it in the past - the Chavez administration inflating the success of the scam-era program (read it here) and flat out lying about the number of sworn police officers over at APD (read it here). We saw it just today - the Chavez administration caught once again "overstating" the numbers when it comes to claims of progress in reducing Albuquerque's carbon emissions (ABQ Journal - Subscription).

(Sidebar)
Lest you believe that we are buying into the whole man made global warming political scare movement - we're not. While temperatures may be on the rise, we're not ready to turn over the keys to our economic engine to a bunch of scientists and zealots whose consensus is that man is responsible for rises in global temperatures. Twenty-five years ago a similar group believed that we were headed into another ice age. There's a huuuuge difference between scientific consensus and scientific fact.
(End Sidebar)

While the Journal managed to expose the Almighty Alcaldes's greenhouse gas, they've been gobbling up stories about Albuquerque's Animal Control fed to them by former Journal reporter and current $70,000 a year Marty Man, Jim Ludwig.

(Sidebar)
This is a case where The Almighty Marty took a page from Big Bill's playbook. Hiring a former reporter allows him to shape public opinion by getting favorable stories into the mainstream media and mitigate damaging stories when they occur. It's sheer genius on the part of the politician but MSM consumers have to remember that it creates a cozy if not obvious relationship between the media outlets and the politicians that the former reporters now represent.
(End Sidebar)

Let's take a look at the first of three stories recently run by Jim Ludwig's former co-workers. In the December 13th story "Good News for Critters" by Dan McKay (Subscription), the administration makes incredible claims that live exits from shelters are up 14% and euthanasia is down 19%. The Eyes have it that while the shelter has made gains, the numbers are no where near 14% and 19%. In fact, the numbers we've seen are live exit increase of 9% ('07 LE 44%/'08 LE 53%) and a euthanasia decrease of 9% ('07 EUTH 56%/'08 EUTH 47%) over the same September - October - November time period.

What's more interesting is that Chavez and crew are claiming that these gains are due to Marty's creation of a director's level position over at Animal Control. Back in September, The Almighty One fired (or more precisely, reassigned) former Animal Control supervisor Denise Wilcox replacing her with Jeanine Patterson; whose background is nursing not animal husbandry. McKay's article claims that these gains are since September, but in reality the numbers for July and August are almost identical to those from September through November meaning Marty's change had nothing to do with the improvements.

The second story by D'Val Westphal (a bit of a Marty-phite herself) entitled "City's Toasting Animal Welfare Revamp This Year," makes another set of claims that don't seem to hold up to scrutiny.

Four months ago, Mayor Martin Chávez ordered a shakeup of what was then Animal Services. He says when he learned almost 1,500 healthy animals got sick in the shelters this year and ended up being euthanized and disposed of like so much garbage, he had to do something major.

- ABQ Journal (Subscription)

Here's the problem... The claim that 1,500 animals that "became sick while in the shelter" is disputed by our Eyes. They claim that only 382 healthy dogs became sick while in the shelter. Now... we know that we didn't mention cats but even if a plague of biblical proportions hit the shelter we have a hard time buying that 1,118 cats or other animals made up the difference.

Moving on to the final PR piece dutifully placed by Jim Ludwig and printed by the Journal "Animal Shelters are Empty".

For the first time in their history, the city of Albuquerque's east- and west-side shelters have no animals available for adoption— all found homes at a weekend event.

More than 500 dogs and cats were adopted at Home 4 the Holidays, held Friday, Saturday and Sunday in a parking lot at Cottonwood Mall, said Mike Davis, communications director of Watermelon Mountain Ranch, a no-kill shelter in Rio Rancho that was one of several sponsors.

-ABQ Journal (Subscription)

This according to our Eyes was the most egregious exaggeration of all. Our Eyes tell us that the adopt-a-thon was held December 21st through the 23rd and that a few days after the event 67 dogs and 55 cats were still available before December 24th. Further, the Eyes have it that while the press was treated to visuals of an empty kennel in building A, the animals were moved into the other two kennel buildings in order to create the illusion of an empty kennel for a media eager to see our beloved dogs and cats placed in happy homes.

Frankly, we'd love to see every healthy animal that doesn't pose a danger to society placed in happy homes too. However, it's more important to us that the city and the Chavez administration tell us the truth - regardless of how it affects their political future.

One thing that we are able to confirm is that Animal Control (yes... we know the benevolent Marty calls it Animal Welfare, a marketing move if we've ever seen one) seems to be in chaos. Despite the recent mending of the rift between The Mayer (Councilor Mayer) and the mayor, nothing seems to have substantively improved since The Almighty One took complete control (and credit) of the now Animal Welfare Department. In fact, there are currently a number of law suits filed against the city that seem to indicate that at the very least, things aren't as rosy in the kennels as The Almighty Alcalde would have us believe.

More importantly, it's hard to believe that the administration is telling us anything resembling the truth when it comes to any kind of statistical data. Claims of red light scam-eras reducing accidents - not true. The claim of almost 1,100 APD officers - not true. Claims of the City of Albuquerque reducing its greenhouse gas emissions - not true. Now it seems that our furry friends are being used to make us believe we are not only a greener Albuquerque but a kinder, gentler one as well.

The folks on the 11th floor and the one who leads them are giving us the best argument that we can think of for term limits. The more entrenched mayors are, the more likely they are to bend, break, and/or ignore the rules. Even when they're not taking liberties with legal and ethical standards, they're busy using their own version of fuzzy math; hoping that no one will notice that their claims cannot be supported by hard statistical data. When challenged, they simply claim that was an unintentional error and act like it never happened.

A few things to remember... This is the mayor that brought us the ABQ PAC scandal - yet, we re-elected him. This is the mayor that brought us the evidence room scandal - yet, we re-elected him. This is the mayor that wants to strike down term limits for himself. The question is if he is successful, are we foolish enough to put the reigns of power back in his scandal-covered hands and are we willing to continue to accept his fuzzy math?

Infallible? Hardly.

As you all know by now, Chief Schultz, Mayor Marty, ET al. has been trying to convince us that their little red light scam-eras are infallible. In fact so infallible that you really don't need to have a fair and impartial hearing by an independent judge or at least a disinterested third party. Obviously you're guilty because there's a picture of you at that intersection.

Apparently the geniuses down under at Redflex don't realize that the intersection of San Mateo and Montgomery is in New Mexico, not Minnesota. According to the Albuquerque Journal (Subscription) Omar Vigil had his scam-era citation dismissed in Marty-roo court when he presented his citation that read "San Mateo and Montgomery, Albuquerque, MN."

Whoa... not only is San Mateo and Montgomery in Minnesota, Albuquerque is in Minnesota. We wonder how you'd say Albuquerque with a Minnesooota accent.

Vigil told the Journal "It's at least reasonable suspicion that the system is faulty." Damn tootin'! And if you'll remember this isn't the first time that the scam-eras at that intersection have malfunctioned. Back in August we showed you that very intersection (one of the first scam sites in Albuquerque) happily clicking away as all of the vehicles in the surveyed lanes were at a complete stop. We've helpfully posted the scam-era foul-up below.


Will the city pull every citation issued at the Montgomery - San Mateo intersection and refund the money because the citations were improperly issued? Will the city even check to see how long the infallible Redflex system has been improperly issuing citations and whether or not they're being properly issued at the other 19 scam-era locations?

For the answer, simply ask the 1300 or so people who were given scam-van citations for driving over the speed limit in a 55 MPH zone, when the zone was really a 65 MPH zone (read about it here). Marty and company seem to have the ability to find dastardly scam-era criminals in order to deliver their citations, but a complete and utter inability to find them when the scam-era system screws-up. Incompetent? Absolutely. Infallible? Hardly.

Fisher - Off the Hook

We told you right before Christmas that the Eyes had it that Officer Matt Fisher was being implicated as the co-conspirator in the Jason Daskalos DWI duck-out from APD custody (read it here). Today our Eyes found out that Officer Fisher is off the hook so to speak.

Apparently, there are no plans to indict Officer Fisher at this time. Of course there were no plans to indict former Officer Ben Kirby until he had the temerity to sue to get his job back.

Speaking of Kirby... We're wondering exactly where this development leaves the DA's case against the former officer. We're not a lawyer but don't you need more than one person for a conspiracy? You'll remember that our Eyes had it that the Kirby grand jury came to a screeching halt when a juror decided to ask exactly who the other conspirators were (read it here).

We'd think at this point the DA is going to have a tough time of getting around this particular elephant in the room. Either they're going to have to start naming people involved in the conspiracy or settle for indicting a ham sandwich - 'cause they don't seem to be able to get Kirby without it.

Eye Poll: Not Safe in Albuquerque

Back in October we ran this same poll (see the results here). We're not happy to announce that there has been little change in the past couple of months. Those of us who reside here in Albuquerque by and large do not feel safe.

In our unscientific poll 43% of Eye readers felt unsafe, 19% felt somewhat unsafe, 27% felt somewhat safe, and only 11% felt safe (see the results here). The results are almost identical to those of our October poll. No matter how you slice it we don't feel safe and thus far APD and Chief of Police Mayor Martin Chavez don't seem to be making any progress in that regard.

This week we look into how you feel about the possibility of a third consecutive term for Mayor Chavez. Don't forget to vote!

Couldn't, Couldn't, Couldn't, Shouldn't

KOB TV Channel 4 is reporting that Mayor Martin "Hugo" Chavez is taking the first step towards another term as Albuquerque's Alcalde. Apparently his recently fizzled senatorial campaign has inspired his honor to challenge the provision in Albuquerque's City Charter that prohibits mayors from serving more than two consecutive terms.

You'll remember that The Almighty One is already serving his third term as Eyeand's mayor only interrupted by Jim "The Duck Man" Baca's ill-fated term that ran from 1997 to 2001. In 1998 Marty's political ambition prompted him not to seek re-election for a second consecutive term so that he could take on Governor Gary Johnson in the 1998 gubernatorial campaign. The incumbent Johnson kept Chavez out of Santa Fe by defeating him 55% to 45%.

Since that time Chavez has managed re-election to Albuquerque's mayor's office twice but his attempts to move beyond the 11th floor have been thwarted not once but twice and that's just since his last election. Now Marty thinks that he needs to find a fall back position just in case the political winds continue to blow against him.

So now the mayor is challenging limits on his mayoral power not in council or at the ballot box, but in court on the basis that the limit is unconstitutional under the state's constitution. Most people seem to agree that the Almighty One has a pretty good chance in front of the robed ones since the council's term limits have already been struck down.

(Sidebar)
Our Eyes tell us that Marty has been telling people that if he were not to win the senate race - which he can't now that he's out - he'd leave public office and make some real money in the private sector. The Eyes have it that he's being courted by (or courting himself) environmental special interest groups who have plans to send him to Washington to lobby for their cause.

A note here to anyone who wants Marty to lobby for them - our Eyes tell us that every time he was in Santa Fe during the last session, his lobbying actually hurt his legislative agenda.
(End Sidebar)

In KOB's report with reporter Stewart Dyson, the mayor is quoted as saying that "at the end of this term I may decide to say... I'm going to ride off into the sunset and do something else." From what we've heard the mayor may decide not to run for a fourth term, but he's obviously trying to keep his political options open.

We've got to hand it to The Almighty One here. If he does decide to run for a fourth term, from a political stand point he has to challenge the term limits now. If he were to wait until the campaign for mayor became the focal point of local politics he'd only look like a power hungry politician whose options are limited and ego demands that he retain some kind of political power.

By suing now, he'll be flying under the cover of a national election that sucks up all of the oxygen in the mainstream media room. We're sure that he hopes the general public here in Albuquerque will forget that he was power-hungry enough to be compelled to sue to be able to maintain power. Unfortunately, he's got a track record of getting passes from the mainstream media and who knows; the winds of his political fortune could shift to his stern a year from now.

You know... twelve years should be enough for anyone in a job as demanding as that of the Mayor of Albuquerque. Why anyone would want to continue is beyond us, unless of course they are driven by a need to be important and a desire to hold power at all costs; which sounds more and more like that South American Chavez.

In short, Marty couldn't be Governor in 1998. He couldn't be Governor in 2010. He couldn't be Senator in 2008. Now he shouldn't sue to keep his office on the 11th floor unless of course he wants to prove that he's a desperate politician with a limited future and an unholy desire to maintain power.