Lockslay behaves badly, you foot the bill.

The Journal reports this morning, link, on the Locksley settlement.

In summary and surmise;

• Locksley misbehaved.
• A legitimate complaint was filed.
• A settlement agreement was arranged.
• The agreement is going to cost taxpayers, not Locksley,
  a bunch.
• How big of a bunch remains secret from taxpayers, according to "the law".
• Schmidly refuses to respond to legitimate questions from stakeholders, and there is nothing you can do about it.
• Krebs refuses to reason to respond to legitimate questions from stakeholders, and there is nothing you can do about it.

This is nothing new in settlements of complaints against good ol' boys behaving badly. It is not limited to UNM.

There exists; incontrovertible evidence of felony criminal perjury by a senior APS administrator. There was no criminal prosecution of APS' Director of Risk Management, according to a "settlement" agreement. It was agreed that in exchange for a few tens of thousands of tax dollars, that evidence would never be turned over to any agency of law enforcement. If anyone cares, the settlement agreement is a public record.

As a more contemporary example; the leadership of the APS holds evidence of felony criminal misconduct involving APS senior administrators, link. It has been more than 2 1/2 years. They still have not surrendered the evidence to the criminal justice system. Statutes of limitation on criminal misconduct have long since expired.

The New Mexico Attorney General's Office is aware of the situation and so far, will not even investigate credible allegations of criminal misconduct by the senior leadership of the state's largest school district, and their publicly funded private police force.

I understand that you can negotiate with a "disgruntled" employee to determine some amount of money to be given to them in exchange for their not filing a civil suit. I have never understood, how tax dollars can be used to buy immunity from criminal prosecution.

It just seems wrong somehow.