By way of background;
is in a bind. She has inherited a
whole bunch of problems up to
and including a cover up of a
cover up of felony criminal
misconduct involving APS senior
administrators and the leadership
of their publicly funded private police force.
Because there is so much secrecy surrounding problems in leadership of the APS, even Reedy really has no idea how bad things actually are. She admitted as much to the Journal, link;
“I don’t have the whole picture – nobody does.”Reedy needs to know the truth even if only to help her hide it more effectively.
In the absence of any evidence to the contrary; Houser's investigative findings are to become "the property" of the leadership of the APS. They will disseminate them according to their own interests.
If the findings are embarrassing, shaming or indicting, the leadership of the APS will spend operational funds without limit and without real oversight, on litigation and legal weaselry in order to keep the records hidden until their relevance expires.
That is is exactly what they did with the findings and evidence of felony corruption in the leadership of their police force, link. They hid public records behind an army of lawyers until statutes of limitation finally expired on felony criminal misconduct.
In any event, the Journal editors called bullshit on Reedy's plan in an editorial yesterday; link.
The ball is in Reedy's court; the editors have called her out. She has only two choices; respond to their call or ignore it; change her plan or plunge ahead with it as is.
Reedy has no choice but to plunge ahead with an investigation that reeks of appearances of conflicts of interests and impropriety. She has no choice because she has to do some kind of investigation and a real investigation by independent investigators would bring down their house of cards.
Reedy can only afford to "hire" an investigator who is willing keep what they find secret from stake and interest holders.
I expect that what she and the leadership of the APS will do, is to simply ignore the editorial.
I expect that what the editors will do, is to simply ignore her ignoring them.
Else, they would be order up an investigation and report of their own, on ethics, standards and accountability in the leadership of the APS.