Journal doubles down on Schultz endorsement

Journal reporter Jeff Proctor
sang mightily Sunday, link,
in support of APD Chief
Ray Schultz.

Despite the fact that Schultz
has had about six years to fix
a number of very serious
problems,



Proctor, and by proxy
Journal management,
claim Schultz is the
very person we need
to fix them.

The premise is nonsense
on its face; you don't hire
the surgeon who botched
your surgery, to operate
on the damage.

Proctor's praise drew criticism from at least one respected cop, link.

Now covering fire from Journal management, link, in what is hard to call anything but a conspiracy to deliberately manipulate public opinion.

If Jeff Proctor and the Journal were operating honestly, they would investigate and report upon Police Department morale. They won't. Why?

If Police Department morale is high, it would indicate the Schultz was providing good leadership. If the Journal could report that Schultz has the support of the rank and file, they would.

The truth is, morale is in the toilet. Just ask.

And because low morale, a remarkably reliable indicator of institutional ill health, is also are remarkably reliable measure of leadership, the Journal will cover Schultz' ass by not investigating and reporting on the collapse of morale in the APD. They will not tell interest holders that Schultz is hiding a morale problem; that if he were subject to a vote of confidence, he would fail.

Not that votes of no confidence amount to hill of beans.

Ask the king of no confidence votes Darren White. He had three, and they didn't slow him down one bit in his climb to the top.

And it wasn't them that precipitated his fall from grace.

Ask UNM President David Schmidly how much the vote of no confidence slowed him down. Or Paul Krebs.




What do you suppose would be the results of a vote of confidence of APS employees, on APS Supt Winston Brooks?

Why do you think he doesn't allow subordinate evaluation? The privileged class don't voluntarily conduct or willingly allow subordinate evaluations of their conduct and competence.

It is in fact, their most important privilege; it is the fundamental privilege; it is the cloak of invisibility that hides them from accountability for usurping and abusing all of the other privileges they claim, and to which they are not entitled.

It isn't because they would come out of subordinate evaluation with colors flying, that they don't commission them, it is precisely because they would not.

And why is it that we recognize and respect the intellect, education and experience of people like cops and teachers, except when it has to do with their opinion of the character and competence of the people whose will they follow?




photos Mark Bralley