Tellez investigation goes dark!

APS Chief of Police Steve Tellez is on paid administrative leave while an investigation takes place regarding his alleged "employee misconduct".








The leadership of the APS, by and through APS Executive Director of Communications Monica Armenta does not care to elaborate.

The leadership of the APS, by and through Monica Armenta, say this is a "personnel matter".

The people's right to know is trumped by the public servant's opportunity to hide it.

I would say the terms of public in-servitude are the prerogative of the people and not of the public servants.  It is up to the people to decide what truth about the spending of their power and resources will be told to them, and what will not.

In the interests of justice; the investigation should proceed with due quickness and speed.  In the interests of the leadership of the APS;

"There is no schedule for the investigation"

How about right now?  How's that for a schedule?  Is the investigator too busy?  Haven't people had enough time to get their stories straight?

The right time to do the right thing is always right now. unk 

APS Supt Winston Brooks may insist upon a timely beginning and
early conclusion of the investigation, or, he may not.  We'll just have to wait and see.

According to the Journal, link,  

Albuquerque Public Schools has hired a third party to investigate a complaint made against its police chief, Steve Tellez.

It is important to note that the "investigator" works for and reports only to the leadership of the APS; not for you, not to you, and not to the DA.

The investigator will produce his findings to the leadership of the APS; and to them only.  Apparently, even if there is criminal misconduct the findings.

The last time this happened, in the Spring of 07, the Journal relayed an assurance from the leadership of the APS, that they would produce the findings in a couple of weeks.

We're still waiting.

A question for the Journalism ethicists, does the Journal, because they deliberately and willingly forwarded an assurance from the leadership of the APS, that they would shared the findings publicly, at least tacitly recommend that their readers accept that assurance?  Do they have any consequent ethical obligation to remind their readers about the assurance they approved, and then point out to their readers that the assurance was nothing more than a bunch of hooey?


Because the leadership of the APS and their lawyers hired the guy who hired the lawyer who hired an investigator who hired another investigator to investigate public corruption and incompetence in the leadership of the APS, the leadership of the APS will claim ownership of the truth in the findings albeit at the great distance they have created.

And then will vigorously defend their interests with all the lawyers, guns and money they could possibly ask for.  How about an unlimited budget for litigation?

Tellez chat with his boss APS COO Brad Winter, officer looks on.

Tellez removing peaceful protesters from a "public input" meeting

Tellez, in addition to "just following orders" is defending interests of his own.

He is trying to keep the findings of investigations into the 2006 scandal hidden.

The findings are that Tellez was second in command at the time the Gil Lovato was running amok, link, in plain sight.

The findings are that Tellez knew what was going on and didn't act to expose it, or he didn't know what going on and then you have to wonder; why the hell not?

Was his ignorance willful?

The findings are that Tellez' public service before and during the scandal was manifestly corrupt and or incompetent.

The findings are public records that do not enjoy exception under the NM Mexico Inspection of Public Records Act; not in spirit an not in letter.

I am suing them currently in federal court over their ongoing refusal to produce these very public records including but not limited to the findings of their last private investigator.

You have no idea how much money they're willing to spend to obfuscate the production of public records.  Really, you have no idea what they spending, because those records too, are hidden behind their lawyers.

The leadership of the APS won't say who the private investigator will be.

They will insulate the findings through a number of layers, each of can be dragged through as much litigation as they care to conduct.  They spend without oversight.

I hope you heard what I just wrote.

Oversight over the spending on legal defenses for senior administrators and school board members is provided by subordinates.  The board's obligation to hear case analyses of pending litigation (to provide school board oversight) over litigation of public interests, is abandoned when their own interests in litigation.

Cost is no object; they have a budget as unlimited as their entire operational funds discretionary budget.

"Deputy Chief Steve Gallegos will serve as acting chief during the investigation."

Gallegos, in charge while Armenta gives me the APS thumb.

Terrific, same hen house; different fox.

Deputy Chief Gallegos has the same personal interest as Steve Tellez in hiding the findings of their complicity or complacency in scandals in the leadership of APS' publicly funded private police force.

If an  investigative reporter asked, s/he would find that all of these findings are immediately available.  As such, APS has 3 business days to produce them or, to defend their refusal to immediately produce them.

They will do neither. They will not produce them and they will not explain why they will not.

They will explain in as legal briefs as their lawyers care to write, "how" they will not produce ethically redacted public records of findings.  They will not explain why they care to take advantage of those exceptions, even if they did legitimately exist.

The local media, to the extent that they consider themselves to be the press and all that entails, have an obligation to ask for the ethically redacted public record and then

1. report on the records or
2. report on Winston Brooks' refusal to produce them.

There has been a decision made at the Journal, at KRQE, at KOAT and at KOB to

1. not ask and or 
2. not report on Brooks' refusal to produce the findings of investigations into allegations of public corruption and incompetence in the leadership of the APS police department in particular and administration in general.

I don't know and it's surprisingly hard to find out whose fist pounds the table last when these kinds of decisions are made at the Journal, KRQE, KOAT and KOB TV.

Armenta, Maes pose for photo

At the level of station owners and general managers, I suspect the influence of the New Mexico Broadcasters Assoc President and CEO Paula Maes.

The former APS School Board heavy hitter has undoubtedly done whatever she could to discourage her friends and colleagues from digging too deeply into the darker aspects of the leadership of the APS.



I know that APS School Board President Marty Esquivel and Journal Managing Editor Kent Walz are friends.

And Esquivel works for KRQE.







I know the decision to not investigate and report upon incompetence and corruption in the leadership of the APS is not made at the level of investigative reporters.

It would be interesting to know at what level that decision is made, and who made it.

Who investigates and reports upon that?




photos Mark Bralley
thumbs up by  ched macquigg