Massachusetts has become the front line in a battle being waged for liberty. As few as nine days ago the Boston Globe had Republican Scott Brown trailing Democrat Martha Coakley by 15 points. Many believed that the battle had been lost and that Obama's tyrannical agenda would be confirmed.
Since the 10th of January the tide has turned and the polls have followed as Massachusetts patriots once again defend freedom and liberty. Will it be in time? Will it be enough? We find out today.
Jan 19, 2010
Jan 18, 2010
Coattails Count
If the politics of 2009 taught us anything, it should be that the people with whom a candidate associates are important. On a national level, we have a tax cheat in charge of the treasury and Green Jobs Czar Van Jones was forced to resign over a bevy of radical revelations. A candidate's coattails give authority to a variety of non-elected officials whose decisions have direct impact on our lives—people we may not have elected if we had the choice. We typically vote on the candidate's charisma and qualifications without thinking about the impact of his or her "friends."
In New Mexico, in 2003 Governor Richardson appointed Joanna Prukop as the Secretary over the Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department. With a bachelor's and master's degree in wildlife biology and 26 years in the Department of Game and Fish, she was given the authority over New Mexico's oil, gas, and mining industry—our primary economic engine. As her detrimental policies have been implemented, the oil and gas industry has nearly stalled out. Many companies have pulled out and the locals are now drilling out of state—with one specifically telling me that it is easier for them to drill in California than here at home.
As New Mexico's budget is running on empty, despite the fact that it formerly had a surplus when other states were in trouble, our citizens are taking a closer look at the policies that got us into this predicament. The poking around points back to Prukop and her personal project "the Pit Rule." Recently, in the Albuquerque Journal, she tried to deflect the blame for the state's economic woes toward declining global oil and gas prices—which in fact deserves some blame. However, the fact that companies find California a friendlier environment for business cannot be due just to temporarily lower prices.
I don't blame her for wanting to defend herself. We all want to end life with a favorable legacy. No, her life is not over, but her life in New Mexico government is. With the end of 2009 came the end of her tenure in Richardson's cabinet. Those frightened by proposed cuts in services or afraid of cuts to school budgets plus everyone in New Mexico who wishes for our state to climb up from the ladder's bottom rung, may cheer with the thought of new leadership. Not!
The new Cabinet Secretary for the Department of Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources is again appointed by our Governor. The pick is no better, and may be worse. At least Prukop has a science background, albeit wildlife biology.
The new Secretary is Ron Goldstein. I hear he is a pleasant fellow and I don't intend to personally denigrate him, but he has no business being in charge of the state's extractive industries. He has no science or energy background. His education is in history. Prior to coming to New Mexico, he has been in journalism. Appropriately, there are many quotes from him in New Mexico's newspapers. Sadly, many of them are anti-energy—specifically anti-nuclear energy. (This, in a state that has an abundance of uranium, a uranium enrichment facility and a world-class nuclear waste site. We are only missing a nuclear power plant.)
Again, this is not to fault Goldstein. He has had a nice climb up the ranks of government employment—especially for someone so young. But the person in charge of our energy development should be someone who understands energy—or at least economics. Not a journalist with a degree in history! Before Goldstein can fully take charge, he must be nominated and confirmed by the senate in the upcoming legislative session. Contact the State Senators and tell them that you want someone in charge of the state's economic engine who understands energy, its role in the state’s budget, and its overall importance to the citizens New Mexico. Ask him that they vote against Goldstein’s confirmation.
Better yet, insist on a restructuring of the department—back to its pre 1987 state. Does it make sense to have the same person in charge of the parks and oil wells? We need someone in charge of energy who can focus on energy, not someone whose achievement after 7 years of service is "protecting critical wildlife habitats" and "conserving natural lands!" While the change is unlikely to take place in the waning days of the Richardson leadership, we can plant the idea and expect it from the new governor—whoever he or she may be.
Marita Noon is the executive director of the Citizens Alliance for Responsible Energy (CARE), a nonprofit organization that offers facts on America’s energy options so citizens are educated on the energy reality and can make decisions accordingly. She can be reached at marita@responsiblenergy.org or www.responsiblenergy.org.
In New Mexico, in 2003 Governor Richardson appointed Joanna Prukop as the Secretary over the Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department. With a bachelor's and master's degree in wildlife biology and 26 years in the Department of Game and Fish, she was given the authority over New Mexico's oil, gas, and mining industry—our primary economic engine. As her detrimental policies have been implemented, the oil and gas industry has nearly stalled out. Many companies have pulled out and the locals are now drilling out of state—with one specifically telling me that it is easier for them to drill in California than here at home.
As New Mexico's budget is running on empty, despite the fact that it formerly had a surplus when other states were in trouble, our citizens are taking a closer look at the policies that got us into this predicament. The poking around points back to Prukop and her personal project "the Pit Rule." Recently, in the Albuquerque Journal, she tried to deflect the blame for the state's economic woes toward declining global oil and gas prices—which in fact deserves some blame. However, the fact that companies find California a friendlier environment for business cannot be due just to temporarily lower prices.
I don't blame her for wanting to defend herself. We all want to end life with a favorable legacy. No, her life is not over, but her life in New Mexico government is. With the end of 2009 came the end of her tenure in Richardson's cabinet. Those frightened by proposed cuts in services or afraid of cuts to school budgets plus everyone in New Mexico who wishes for our state to climb up from the ladder's bottom rung, may cheer with the thought of new leadership. Not!
The new Cabinet Secretary for the Department of Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources is again appointed by our Governor. The pick is no better, and may be worse. At least Prukop has a science background, albeit wildlife biology.
The new Secretary is Ron Goldstein. I hear he is a pleasant fellow and I don't intend to personally denigrate him, but he has no business being in charge of the state's extractive industries. He has no science or energy background. His education is in history. Prior to coming to New Mexico, he has been in journalism. Appropriately, there are many quotes from him in New Mexico's newspapers. Sadly, many of them are anti-energy—specifically anti-nuclear energy. (This, in a state that has an abundance of uranium, a uranium enrichment facility and a world-class nuclear waste site. We are only missing a nuclear power plant.)
Again, this is not to fault Goldstein. He has had a nice climb up the ranks of government employment—especially for someone so young. But the person in charge of our energy development should be someone who understands energy—or at least economics. Not a journalist with a degree in history! Before Goldstein can fully take charge, he must be nominated and confirmed by the senate in the upcoming legislative session. Contact the State Senators and tell them that you want someone in charge of the state's economic engine who understands energy, its role in the state’s budget, and its overall importance to the citizens New Mexico. Ask him that they vote against Goldstein’s confirmation.
Better yet, insist on a restructuring of the department—back to its pre 1987 state. Does it make sense to have the same person in charge of the parks and oil wells? We need someone in charge of energy who can focus on energy, not someone whose achievement after 7 years of service is "protecting critical wildlife habitats" and "conserving natural lands!" While the change is unlikely to take place in the waning days of the Richardson leadership, we can plant the idea and expect it from the new governor—whoever he or she may be.
Marita Noon is the executive director of the Citizens Alliance for Responsible Energy (CARE), a nonprofit organization that offers facts on America’s energy options so citizens are educated on the energy reality and can make decisions accordingly. She can be reached at marita@responsiblenergy.org or www.responsiblenergy.org.
Jan 13, 2010
Gone are the Days of Diego
The Days of special treatment are over for Firefighter 1st Class Diego Arencón. Tuesday, the Albuquerque Journal reported that Arencón - the IAFF Local 244 Union President - was instructed to report to Fire Chief Breen for assignment. Until Monday, Arencón was pulling down the tidy sum of around $90,000 (read our take here). Not too surprisingly, the suddenly poorer Arencón wasn't happy about the new arrangement.
The side agreement entered into by former Mayor and Not-So-Might Alcalde Martin Chavez was determined to be illegal by attorney and current CAO David Campbell.
What we're wondering is how Campbell - an attorney - can determine that Arencón's little side deal with Marty is illegal when he's got an even bigger fish - Ed Adams - making a lot more over in Municipal Development.
Then there's Lawrence Torres who slipped in and out of APD and like a thief in the night stole a 20 year retirement and two months worth of an $80,000 a year salary from the department aided abetted by Ed Adams who signed a similar "agreement" with Torres.
Look... If Arencóns dirty deal with Marty is illegal then so too is Adams' deal signed by Perlman. If Adams' deal with Perlman is illegal then so is Torres' deal with Adams and for all of the same reasons.
Paying Firefighter Diego Arenón the same as other firefighters and requiring him to well, fight fires is a good start. But while the Days of Diego may be over, those benefiting from dirty side deals with the devil, uh... Marty are still in play and we're paying for them.
The union negotiated for the president's salary when it reached a contract agreement with the city in 2008, and the city should honor it, Arencón said. The salary agreement is separate from the main union contract.But don't worry, back in December the members of IAFF 244 re-elected Diego to another term which means so he's still got access to the union credit card to pay for his coffee and trips to the local watering holes (read it here). What will be more interesting is whether or not the union membership will agree to pay for a lawsuit for the express purpose of getting Diego Commander's pay and out of having to do fight any fires.
Arencón said firefighters "absolutely" will consider going to court to enforce the salary agreement. Refusing to honor it will cost the city legal fees, even though mayoral executives know "full well that their accusations aren't justified."
The side agreement entered into by former Mayor and Not-So-Might Alcalde Martin Chavez was determined to be illegal by attorney and current CAO David Campbell.
In a memo to Arencón, Campbell said the salary agreement:
• Violates the anti-donation clause of the state constitution, which bars the city from providing a gift or aid to someone.
• Might violate state law making it a felony to use or accept public money for "services not rendered."
• Wasn't properly ratified.
• Violates the city's "Merit System Ordinance," which calls for employees to be paid according to a classification plan.
What we're wondering is how Campbell - an attorney - can determine that Arencón's little side deal with Marty is illegal when he's got an even bigger fish - Ed Adams - making a lot more over in Municipal Development.
An agreement signed in 2006, when Martin Chávez was mayor, says Adams can keep his $147,000 annual salary even if he's moved into a lower-level job.The legal arguments used by CAO David Campbell in the Arencón case look strikingly similar to the ones made by policy analyst and attorney Bruce Thompson on behalf of city council despite the opinion of one of Marty's Minions - City Attorney Bob White - that the Adams' deal "does contain the essential elements of an enforceable employment contract" (ABQ Journal - Subscription).
That's where the 2006 memo comes in. Bruce Perlman, Chávez's chief administrative officer at the time, signed a memorandum telling Adams his "rate of pay will be maintained" if he ever returned to a regular city job.
Thompson's eight-page opinion outlines some potential problems with [former CAO under Marty] Perlman's action:
• It probably violates the city's Merit System Ordinance for employees, which says regular "classified" employees should be paid according to a plan based on their rank and classification. It's not clear that a CAO can "ignore the MSO by issuing an administrative instruction" on someone's salary.
•An administrative instruction that apparently gave Perlman the right to determine Adams' salary came from Perlman himself and may not be valid. In any case, it's not clear whether Perlman complied with it.
• The Adams' salary agreement could be considered a "professional services" contract that requires City Council approval.
• The Adams' salary agreement may violate the anti-donation clause of the state constitution, which prohibits the city government from making gifts. Adams' salary guarantee could violate that clause if it's intended to reward him for past work, and not compensation for future services.
Then there's Lawrence Torres who slipped in and out of APD and like a thief in the night stole a 20 year retirement and two months worth of an $80,000 a year salary from the department aided abetted by Ed Adams who signed a similar "agreement" with Torres.
Look... If Arencóns dirty deal with Marty is illegal then so too is Adams' deal signed by Perlman. If Adams' deal with Perlman is illegal then so is Torres' deal with Adams and for all of the same reasons.
Paying Firefighter Diego Arenón the same as other firefighters and requiring him to well, fight fires is a good start. But while the Days of Diego may be over, those benefiting from dirty side deals with the devil, uh... Marty are still in play and we're paying for them.
Jan 11, 2010
Looking in the Wrong Places
The Berry Administration has decided to study whether or not the Redflex Scam-eras are having a positive impact (forgive the pun) on public safety.
During the first 18 months of the program the city's cash cameras clicked off 80,000 $100 citations (USA Today) that's roughly $5.3 MILLION a year. According to the Journal, last year the Albuquerque program took in some $8.6 MILLION despite the state's cap on fines ($75) - an increase of roughly $3.3 MILLION. The only difference between then and now is who gets the money.
If program revenues are increasing then it follows that driver behavior isn't changing at all. If drivers continue to behave as they always have, no one is safer no matter what the crash statistics are.
But all of these statistics miss the most important point. The Scam-era program deprives the accused with the ability to present even the most basic defense. In other words, the accused are denied their due process rights.
The accused are not immediately notified of the alleged infraction, they are deprived of the ability to gather their own evidence, and are forced to rely on the state's evidence for their defense. In other words, guilty until proven innocent and the proof comes from the state.
In the final analysis, it doesn't matter what the UNM study says because they're looking in the wrong place. Citizens are guaranteed due process rights by the U.S. Constitution. Redflex and their partner governments including the City of Albuquerque are blatantly denying citizens of their constitutionally guaranteed rights. No study will change that fact. No study can change that fact.
[T]he city is asking the University of New Mexico's Institute for Social Research to study whether Albuquerque's streets have become safer in the five-plus years since cameras began snapping pictures of speeders and red light runners.We've been told repeatedly by the Chavez Administration and their Chief of Police Ray Schultz that the Scam-eras are for public safety and more importantly that they change behavior. If Albuquerque Scam-eras really changed driver behavior, wouldn't the revenue generated by the program decrease?
That's the key to the program's future, according to the mayor's office.
The revenue "is something the study will look at, but the mayor has always said the red light camera program has to be about public safety," said T.J. Wilham, Albuquerque's public safety spokesman.
During the first 18 months of the program the city's cash cameras clicked off 80,000 $100 citations (USA Today) that's roughly $5.3 MILLION a year. According to the Journal, last year the Albuquerque program took in some $8.6 MILLION despite the state's cap on fines ($75) - an increase of roughly $3.3 MILLION. The only difference between then and now is who gets the money.
If program revenues are increasing then it follows that driver behavior isn't changing at all. If drivers continue to behave as they always have, no one is safer no matter what the crash statistics are.
APD has claimed a 30 percent to 40 percent decrease in crashes at red-light camera intersections in 2006.So... to sum up. Back in 2007 Scam-eras were raking in roughly $5.3 MILLION a year and the PRC found that APD had lie... uh, exaggerated the effectiveness of the system when in fact some of the accident data indicated an increase in the number of accidents. Fast forward to 2009 when the scam bagged $8.6 MILLION (sending half to the state and half to Redflex) roughly $3.3 MILLION a year more than it did initially. Safer? Hardly.
But according to data obtained from APD by the state Public Regulation Commission, accidents near some of these intersections have actually increased.
But all of these statistics miss the most important point. The Scam-era program deprives the accused with the ability to present even the most basic defense. In other words, the accused are denied their due process rights.
The accused are not immediately notified of the alleged infraction, they are deprived of the ability to gather their own evidence, and are forced to rely on the state's evidence for their defense. In other words, guilty until proven innocent and the proof comes from the state.
In the final analysis, it doesn't matter what the UNM study says because they're looking in the wrong place. Citizens are guaranteed due process rights by the U.S. Constitution. Redflex and their partner governments including the City of Albuquerque are blatantly denying citizens of their constitutionally guaranteed rights. No study will change that fact. No study can change that fact.
Dec 28, 2009
MOU
Former Mayor Martin Chavez is becoming legendary for his little side agreements with his loyal minions. Firefighter's union President Diego Arencón signed an agreement with the Formerly Almighty Alcalde guaranteeing himself a hefty $90,000 a year salary despite holding a position as a Firefighter First Class (read it here). Ed Adams - Marty's right hand man - recently produced one of these little pieces of paper signed by former CAO Bruce Perlman that basically says that Adams has the right to keep his sweet salary ($147,000 a year) no matter what job he holds with the city.
Now our Eyes tell us that in the spirit of spreading the wealth to other Minion Alums, Lawrence Torres has produced a memorandum of understanding signed by former CAO and current Municipal Development employee Ed Adams that moved the former union president back to APD as a Patrolman 1st Class and like Adams Torres managed to keep his over $80,000 a year salary. The move was specifically designed to allow Torres to retire from APD.
You see, APD has a 20 year retirement. Despite the fact that Torres spent only around 15 years in open space, his service in HR (a non-public safety position) counts towards his PERA retirement if he retires from a public safety agency. The problem is according to our Eyes, Torres' allowed his state certification to lapse which would make him ineligible to return to APD as a sworn officer.
Our Eyes have it that back in late October, Deputy Chief McCabe spent some time over at the academy with Torres' file after which the file was noticeably bigger. It doesn't take a genius to guess that the additional forms might have something to do with Torres' certification.
Torres is set to retire later this week. It looks like he'll be able to use his salary from his job as "Employee Relations Director" to determine his retirement benefit and the fact that he's retiring from APD to make him eligible for a 20 year retirement.
The mistake that Adams and company may have made is in allowing Torres to take his former salary back to APD as a P1C. Our Eyes tell us that there are a number of officers who are none too happy that one of their fellow P1Cs was making roughly double their salary - even if it was for just a couple of months. Those officers are considering a lawsuit based on a violation of the APOA's collective bargaining agreement.
These little side agreements were standard operating procedure for the Chavez administration. What concerns us is that APD is still lead by those who have a vested interest in keeping these shenanigans under wraps. So far, three of Marty's closest Minions have been able to produce these MOUs. In the Torres case, Chief Schultz is directly responsible for allowing the move and potentially responsible for altering public records.
It's entirely possible that the Torres transfer was completely legal. But if Mayor Berry truly wants to create a transparent city government, every contract, every expense, every MOU needs to be easily accessible to the public. Taxpayers have to pay these bills... We should at least know what the bills are for.
Now our Eyes tell us that in the spirit of spreading the wealth to other Minion Alums, Lawrence Torres has produced a memorandum of understanding signed by former CAO and current Municipal Development employee Ed Adams that moved the former union president back to APD as a Patrolman 1st Class and like Adams Torres managed to keep his over $80,000 a year salary. The move was specifically designed to allow Torres to retire from APD.
You see, APD has a 20 year retirement. Despite the fact that Torres spent only around 15 years in open space, his service in HR (a non-public safety position) counts towards his PERA retirement if he retires from a public safety agency. The problem is according to our Eyes, Torres' allowed his state certification to lapse which would make him ineligible to return to APD as a sworn officer.
Our Eyes have it that back in late October, Deputy Chief McCabe spent some time over at the academy with Torres' file after which the file was noticeably bigger. It doesn't take a genius to guess that the additional forms might have something to do with Torres' certification.
Torres is set to retire later this week. It looks like he'll be able to use his salary from his job as "Employee Relations Director" to determine his retirement benefit and the fact that he's retiring from APD to make him eligible for a 20 year retirement.
The mistake that Adams and company may have made is in allowing Torres to take his former salary back to APD as a P1C. Our Eyes tell us that there are a number of officers who are none too happy that one of their fellow P1Cs was making roughly double their salary - even if it was for just a couple of months. Those officers are considering a lawsuit based on a violation of the APOA's collective bargaining agreement.
These little side agreements were standard operating procedure for the Chavez administration. What concerns us is that APD is still lead by those who have a vested interest in keeping these shenanigans under wraps. So far, three of Marty's closest Minions have been able to produce these MOUs. In the Torres case, Chief Schultz is directly responsible for allowing the move and potentially responsible for altering public records.
It's entirely possible that the Torres transfer was completely legal. But if Mayor Berry truly wants to create a transparent city government, every contract, every expense, every MOU needs to be easily accessible to the public. Taxpayers have to pay these bills... We should at least know what the bills are for.
Dec 24, 2009
Merry Christmas
Somewhere along the line those two words - Merry Christmas - became controversial. Perhaps they were caught up in the wash of political correctness that flowed from the mindless (or mindful) discrimination perpetrated against the smaller ethnic and religious groups that have always been a part of our society. Perhaps it was the direct result of certain anti-religious elements whose faith dictates the removal of religion from the public square. When all is said and done, the reason doesn't matter when the result is increased intolerance in the name of tolerance.
Since its founding, our country has been a majority Christian nation. That's not to say that these Christians agreed on everything. It seems that there were as many different flavors of Christianity then as there were religions in the world and perhaps more; the same holds true today.
Because of these differences our founding fathers were wise enough to construct our Constitution on the foundation of liberty and freedom. They envisioned a public square not with an absence of religion but rather with a riotous tapestry of religious thought and expression; even if that religion was based on the faith that there's no God at all.
What these men from various religions and varying degrees of faith were most afraid of is that the government would choose one religion over the others even if that religion were a form of Christianity.
It's ironic but often true that groups will use the banner of freedom and tolerance to in fact restrict the freedoms of others. The freedoms of religion, speech, the press, and assembly are freedoms designed specifically for the expression of thought even or especially when that thought is religious in nature.
We've often held that if you do not allow your views or beliefs to be challenged, perhaps you need to re-examine those beliefs and the reasons for them. The same is true for religious belief. If your faith can not withstand the simple expression of "Merry Christmas," then perhaps you should re-examine your own faith - even if that faith is a certainty in the absence of God.
So... to those of you of the Christian faith (no matter which one) who will be celebrating Christmas, we wish you a very Merry Christmas. For those of you who are of different faiths - what ever they may be - we wish you a Merry Christmas as an expression of our faith not as an attack on yours.
----- Editors Note -----
This post first appeared December 24th, 2007. On this Christmas Eve when our freedom is under attack by the very people who have sworn to protect it, our expressions of faith are more important than ever.
Celebrate your faith and take joy in your freedom. Those things that go uncelebrated will exit our lives. Merry Christmas!
Since its founding, our country has been a majority Christian nation. That's not to say that these Christians agreed on everything. It seems that there were as many different flavors of Christianity then as there were religions in the world and perhaps more; the same holds true today.
Because of these differences our founding fathers were wise enough to construct our Constitution on the foundation of liberty and freedom. They envisioned a public square not with an absence of religion but rather with a riotous tapestry of religious thought and expression; even if that religion was based on the faith that there's no God at all.
What these men from various religions and varying degrees of faith were most afraid of is that the government would choose one religion over the others even if that religion were a form of Christianity.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.Unfortunately over the last twenty or thirty years, one religious voice has gained a measure of dominance over the others. In the name of religious freedom this voice has worked tirelessly to reduce or even remove the voice of Christianity in the public square.
It's ironic but often true that groups will use the banner of freedom and tolerance to in fact restrict the freedoms of others. The freedoms of religion, speech, the press, and assembly are freedoms designed specifically for the expression of thought even or especially when that thought is religious in nature.
We've often held that if you do not allow your views or beliefs to be challenged, perhaps you need to re-examine those beliefs and the reasons for them. The same is true for religious belief. If your faith can not withstand the simple expression of "Merry Christmas," then perhaps you should re-examine your own faith - even if that faith is a certainty in the absence of God.
So... to those of you of the Christian faith (no matter which one) who will be celebrating Christmas, we wish you a very Merry Christmas. For those of you who are of different faiths - what ever they may be - we wish you a Merry Christmas as an expression of our faith not as an attack on yours.
----- Editors Note -----
This post first appeared December 24th, 2007. On this Christmas Eve when our freedom is under attack by the very people who have sworn to protect it, our expressions of faith are more important than ever.
Celebrate your faith and take joy in your freedom. Those things that go uncelebrated will exit our lives. Merry Christmas!
Dec 23, 2009
Undisciplined
The New Mexico Law Enforcement Academy Board is another one of those myriad of governmental boards that you've probably never heard of... unless of course you're a law enforcement professional. The board is essentially responsible for setting training standards for officers in the State of New Mexico. They are also responsible for officer certification and "revocation or suspension of certifications for officer misconduct" (read it here).
State law enforcement agencies forward the cases of officers who have been found guilty of a crime or found responsible in a civil proceeding to the NMLEA board for review. The board can then suspend an officer's certification or revoke it. When the state suspends or revokes an officer's state certification, they can no longer work in law enforcement at any police or sheriff's department in the State of New Mexico for as long as they remain uncertified.
The Albuquerque Police Department regularly forwards the cases of officers who have been found responsible for civil rights and other violations to the NMLEA board for review. However, there is one notable exception - Raymond D. Schultz.
Almost a month ago (November 25th), a jury found state certified officer Ray Schultz responsible for violating former Officer Sam Costales' Constitutional right to free speech (ABQ Journal - Subscription). Despite costing the City of Albuquerque almost $1 MILLION, APD has not sent the case to the NMLEA board.
Our Eyes tell us that APD officers who have been found responsible for violating someone's civil rights have not only been forwarded to the NMLEA board for action but have had their certifications pulled for costing the city far less than the approximately $862,000 awarded to Costales.
It's not really all that surprising that the chief's case wouldn't be forwarded to the state for review - after all, the chief's the one making the decision. But the Eyes have it that folks up in Santa Fe are somewhat surprised that no one else has filed a complaint. At the very least one might think that Sam Costales and/or his attorney would make an issue of the finding.
Should the board determine - as the jury did - that Schultz violated someone's civil rights, the board could recommend revocation of his certification. Revocation would make Schultz ineligible to work in any law enforcement capacity.
It's pretty obvious why the chief wouldn't forward his own case to Santa Fe despite having done so with other officers in very similar if not identical situations. A jury of his peers has already found him responsible for violating Sam Costales' 1st Amendment rights costing us over $800,000. A similar finding by the NMLEA board could cost him his job and his Chief's pension.
So, the chief will remain undisciplined and the rank and file will see yet another example of disciplinary inequity.
State law enforcement agencies forward the cases of officers who have been found guilty of a crime or found responsible in a civil proceeding to the NMLEA board for review. The board can then suspend an officer's certification or revoke it. When the state suspends or revokes an officer's state certification, they can no longer work in law enforcement at any police or sheriff's department in the State of New Mexico for as long as they remain uncertified.
The Albuquerque Police Department regularly forwards the cases of officers who have been found responsible for civil rights and other violations to the NMLEA board for review. However, there is one notable exception - Raymond D. Schultz.
Almost a month ago (November 25th), a jury found state certified officer Ray Schultz responsible for violating former Officer Sam Costales' Constitutional right to free speech (ABQ Journal - Subscription). Despite costing the City of Albuquerque almost $1 MILLION, APD has not sent the case to the NMLEA board.
Our Eyes tell us that APD officers who have been found responsible for violating someone's civil rights have not only been forwarded to the NMLEA board for action but have had their certifications pulled for costing the city far less than the approximately $862,000 awarded to Costales.
It's not really all that surprising that the chief's case wouldn't be forwarded to the state for review - after all, the chief's the one making the decision. But the Eyes have it that folks up in Santa Fe are somewhat surprised that no one else has filed a complaint. At the very least one might think that Sam Costales and/or his attorney would make an issue of the finding.
[Sidebar]Our understanding is that anyone can make a complaint that an officer was found to have violated someone's civil/Constitutional rights. The complaint initiates an investigation that may or may not result in action by the board.
Interestingly, Chief Schultz sits on the NMLEA board. We would assume that the New Mexico Law Enforcement Academy would have in place policies to prevent the accused from participating in making decisions in their own cases. But it does bring to mind the question of whether or not Schultz participated in determining punishment for officers that APD had forwarded for review.
[End Sidebar]
Should the board determine - as the jury did - that Schultz violated someone's civil rights, the board could recommend revocation of his certification. Revocation would make Schultz ineligible to work in any law enforcement capacity.
It's pretty obvious why the chief wouldn't forward his own case to Santa Fe despite having done so with other officers in very similar if not identical situations. A jury of his peers has already found him responsible for violating Sam Costales' 1st Amendment rights costing us over $800,000. A similar finding by the NMLEA board could cost him his job and his Chief's pension.
So, the chief will remain undisciplined and the rank and file will see yet another example of disciplinary inequity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)