Early last week, I called the Republican Party of New Mexico
to lodge a complaint against Jon Barela.
Jon Barela just ran against at least three other Republicans for a seat on the Albuquerque Public Schools Board of Education.
The Republican party rules require sitting state officers to vacate their offices before contesting for public position against other Republicans.
Jon Barela still is the First Vice Chairman of the
New Mexico Republican Party.
Jon Barela obviously did not vacate his office.
I have received a response to my complaint;
Email written by Lou Melvin
Sent for Lou Melvin by RPNMMr. MacQuigg,
A friend saw my name on your blog and gave me a copy of the entry dated October 7, 2008, since I do not have e-mail.
I checked my correspondence at the Republican Party of New Mexico office, and no written or e-mailed copy of the complaint mentioned in your blog has been received for me as Rules Committee Chairman. Further, to my knowledge, no written or emailed complaint has been received by any member of the Republican Party of New Mexico Rules Committee to this date.
Please send a written copy of the complaint as you indicated in your blog as having been filed, and which was requested by me during our earlier phone conversation.
A copy of the complaint is necessary to share with the committee members before any action can be formally considered.
Lou Melvin, Chairman
Republican Party of New Mexico Rules Committee
It is as I suspected;
no action has been taken.
None can be unless and until I skip through another hoop or two.
The question is; should it make any difference at all,
how a complaint is delivered?
If the good ol' boys that "lead" the Republican Party of New Mexico, had any inclination at all to enforce the rules,
do you really suppose that they would be waiting on a complaint made in a particular format?
Did they wait on a complaint in a particular format before they crucified Fernando C de Baca?
No practical, good, and ethical purpose is served by not acting
on the complaint as submitted. It amounts to nothing but
game playing in order to weasel out of accountability.
An entire branch of the practice of law is devoted to it.
Juris Mustelidae;Juris as practiced
by members of the weasel family,
or; legal weaselry.
An emailed complaint has been sent.
Finally the good ol' boys will be able to enforce their rules.
For the record, and on my honor;
I was assured by Ms. Melvin that in contacting her,
I had contacted the rules committee and no further action
was required of me. No request was made that the complaint
be re-submitted written form.
5 comments:
I think it is good that he said he has a print-out of your post. This way, if there is any obligation to act by him regarding allegations forwardedd to him, but not in the proper format, he has the basis to start now.
If he is indeed using the excuse that you did not write out the complaint in a certain format, or by using a notary public and affirming the truth of your statement, it may be a VALID one.
State law requires complaints against licensees, for instance against security officers who are not properly licensed or who carry firearms with no firearm training, to be notarized and on a SPECIFIC form. Seriously, or they will not consider it at the Board meeting. It is the the rules for many state agencies, so perhaps they RP has the same language in their bylaws, or they can claim it is customary in the state for such complaints?
If Ms. Melvin or her committee wanted to pursue the complaint they could.
The types of rules you cite are not imposed upon these people, they are created by them to enable them to weasel out of accountability.
Totally true, but if we want Mr. Barela to follow the rules and jump through the easily jumped-throughable hoops? So too then, should we.
You are taking a position of ethical superiority to him by saying you follow and know the rules better than he does. To maintain that position? Jump their rule-hoops, show thm that you are willing to follow the rules even if Mr. Barela did not, maybe especially since.
Follow their rules, and they can't use that you didn't cross the t aor dot the i as an excuse. Will they come up with another excuse, or will they rule fairly?
If you find their paperwork rules inconsequential, then Mr. Barela can use the same defense vis a vis the rules HE broke.
Whether he likes it or not, whether he agrees with it or not,
Jon Barela is a role model of the student standard of conduct.
The student standard of conduct often requires "doing more than the law requires, and less that the law allows."
Barela has an obligation to come clean at the first available opportunity.
There is no excuse for his refusal, least of all that Republican Party Rules and the law allow him to continue to hide the truth from stakeholders.
I was told several times in my career that people don't mind getting their ass kicked by a shiny boot. I am trying to help make you a shiny boot that no one can find fault with, the one that is on the foot of Deputy Ched, Ethics Enforcer.
When I call around and ask if ghosting students is legal, or if the cops can just do whatever they want with an NCIC machine, I get varied reactions. "Who do you think you are?" is the main attitude I get from people, and the phrase "Don't you have anything else BETTER to do?" comes up a lot too.
I do it anyway, because we have a responsibility to act when we see potential harm to society, and especially potential harm to what we know best - schools. I like to argue and debate, but know I agree that it is good to have people like you checking up on those in power over a billion dollars of educational funds per year.
Post a Comment