Ticket probe uncovers dysfunction in County

In the Journal this morning, link; evidence of dysfunction.

Bernalillo County Sheriff Dan Houston is investigating around
what smells like public corruption in County Administration.

He is accused by the County, of being inordinately hamfisted
in his approach.

Public power and resources are caught up in what looks like
interpersonal jousting between the Sheriff and at least one
County Commissioner; Maggie Hart-Stebbins.

Reporter Dan McKay wrote;

The sheriff’s investigation comes after Stebbins and Houston had a public dispute over whether his department can sell a helicopter and use the proceeds to buy other vehicles.

What does that mean?

Is Bernalillo County Sheriff Dan Houston's heavy handedness
payback? Are investigations of public corruption subject to and
affected by personal disputes? Is control over our power and
resources being abused?

Governmental oversight, in whatever form, is the only warranty the people will ever have on the safety of their power and resources in the hands of people they don't even know.

We cannot protect our power and resources except by insisting that politicians and other public servants protect them for us. If we must entrust control over our power and resources to people we don't even know, we must insist that the oversight these same people provide, is adequate. More than adequate, the system that protects our power and resources from abuse must be state of the art; casino security on the spending of the public trust and treasure.

The question of the function of PIOs resurfaced.

The Public Information Office is accused by Houston, of being
"evasive" when his deputies went to retrieve records,

"... many of (which) had already been made available
last month to reporters who simply asked for them."

I have no trouble imagining that the Public Information Office
gave the deputies some lip. To imagine otherwise, is to imagine
a PIO not covering their bosses ass. Which brings up an old
question; to whom are PIOs loyal; the people, or the people they
work for? To whom do they owe their loyalty?

When all is said and done, do Public Information Officers serve
information or disinformation?
Are we paying them to tell the truth or to hide it?

The question is not simply rhetorical.

The manifest answer; their first loyalty is not to the people
and to telling them candidly, forthrightly, and honestly,
how their power and resources are being spent
should be upsetting to the people who pay their generous
salaries.

Are our Public Information Officers a first source for truth
or a first line of defense, between public servants and those
whom they serve?