|
Mountain Monthly
Cloudcroft NM
(505) 682-2208
Email Us
The Mountain Monthly is the newspaper for Cloudcroft and the surrounding area. Visitors use our paper as a guide to the area, while locals and part-time residents subscribe to keep up with local news, and to see if their picture is in the paper!
| |
EDITORIAL RESPONSES
I enjoyed reading your editorial comments
about the “trade-offs” between liberty & security. Those of us
who grew up during World War II, and are fortunate enough to have lived this
long, probably are not as paranoid about “Big Brother’s” intrusions
into our lives, having experienced the draft, rationing, censorship & other
limitations & restrictions on our life styles during those years. And all
without the “benefit” of 24/7 television!
In addition to Orwell’s “1984,”
there have been numerous other books & writings dealing with the insidious
intrusions of government. Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged” came along
a little later, possibly provoked by the McCarthy episode, and it dealt with
government meddling in the extreme.
Our present attitudes about resistance
to government involvement ( The Patriot Act ?) seem to reflect a denial of the
existence of evil, or at least suggesting that there may be more genteel ways
to deal with evil. I think that either attitude, along with our apathy about
“the world around us,” can result in subtle & indirect threats
to our liberties - and our security - in very profound ways. Idealism may make
us feel good, but I believe it is important for us to be on guard to protect
& preserve our unique, but fragile way of life as envisioned & established
by our founding fathers. And we should not hesitate to let our elected representatives
know what we think.
Finally, the evolutionary ( maturing?)
process that you, as a 60’s person, described reminds me of this quote:
“..if one isn’t idealistic at age 20, he/she has no soul; if he/she
still labors under such idealism at age 30/40 (?), then he/she has no brains.”
Sounds Churchillian, but I don’t know??
Robert E. Turrentine
High Rolls
I read the January editorial, I too am
proud to be an American.
I too think it is good that we have caught Saddam Hussein. What he has done
is unforgivable. He will not be able to hurt anyone again. this is good.
It was wonderful to see all of the American
flags after September 11th. it was comforting to attend services with other
Americans of all ages and sing, light candles and pray for the families of all
of the victims and for all of us who were understandably shocked. it is now
wonderful to see all of the yellow ribbons in support of our troops. although
devastating to hear the death toll.
My concern is Bin Laden. he was behind
September 11th and yet we don t have him in our hands. Look at the pain and
destruction he and his people caused us. it is a day that is branded into our
memories forever and yet he is still out there to cause more destruction.
What was bush thinking? Was he thinking?
Obviously the ball was dropped to begin with or they would not have been able
to pull a stunt like they did. Our president, knowing the grief that the families
and Americans were going through, should have made his top priority to capture
and punish this man. We should have focused all of our efforts on finding him
first. I am not a believer in war, but I do believe that no matter what Osama
Bin Laden must be found and made accountable for the deaths of all who died
on September 11th.
Kathy Carew
Connecticut
As your Chief of Police of Cloudcroft, I would like to clarify the truth as to some of the rumors and misconceptions going around our state yet alone our United States as our local newspaper reaches them all.
The schedule of the police Department is a 48-hour shift per officer per week. Paying that officer for 40 hours only of that 48. Even though he is paid for 40, he is on call the other 8 hours and is not allowed to leave the Village except for his home to rest. Police Standard Operating Procedures require the officers to live within a 10-minute response time, of the Village of Cloudcroft.
Every third week, each officer works an extra 24 hours and again is paid for 20 hours AND at straight time. With the exception of the 24 hour day every third week (paid at 20 hours), my officers and I receive overtime only after we’ve worked the 48 hour shift (paid for 40) per week. This is not because we have asked for this type pay, nor agreed to this. It’s only because we are refused our pay when submitted. When the fourth officer was put on administrative leave, this left the one-day per week that he worked, open. The Village screamed about paying an officer for this day. I, as your Chief of Police, worked that day with no offer of any type of pay. That was a 24 hour shift with absolutely no pay, not by desire did I do this, but by law I must cover the Village twenty four seven. The hours worked have not yet, been submitted for payment.
When an officer is on vacation or sick leave, we must cover his shift with an off duty officer. By Law, a man has to be paid overtime at some point. Unlike the maintenance department and the administration office, we have three officers; each department has 5 employees and is not required to cover one’s shift, should he or she be off. By Law, the Police department is required to give the Village a 24 hour, 7 day per week coverage. We are Sworn to Serve and Protect, and if we are forced to do this at straight pay or no pay, we do exactly what is required of us. The Village of Cloudcroft must answer to the labor board as to why they are not paying the proper overtime payment.
As for the budget of the Village, the total expenditures for the this fiscal year is over 2.9 million dollars, of this, the Police Departments total expenditures are 223,000 dollars, if my math is right, that is about 7.4% of the budget. We are the only department required to cover the Village 24 hours per day 7 days per week with 3 employees. The other 2 departments have 5 employees each and work 8 hours per day. In checking with other towns, they have indicated that their police budget is 50 to 75% of the total budget. While inquiring, those towns wanted to know how we were able to keep the budget so low for the Police Department.
As for the amount of vacation time, this is the first time in Cloudcroft’s History an officer has stayed long enough to acquire this amount of leave. As Chief of Police for five years, I’ve been employed with the Village 14 years and receive 6 hours vacation per pay period. The other officers, one with 5 years and the other with 9 years, each receive 5 hours per pay period. All three of us receive 3 hours sick leave per pay period.
As for attitude, we as Police Officers can deal with the bad people, it’s the one’s that are in higher power we need to look out for. Instead of standing with us, they stand in front of us finding everything they can possibly find wrong, when in reality, there is nothing wrong with our Police Department that I, as Chief of Police, could not handle, should I be allowed to do my job the proper way, as they hired me to do to begin with. There are chains of command that need to be followed in every job. I as the Chief have asked everyone above me to follow those chains. They refuse to go by their own Village By-Laws. No one should be arguing with my officers or telling them what to do. This should go through me as Your Chief of Police. They are under my command and I am under my higher powers command. When chain is not followed, it leaves great confusion for all employees.
As Your Chief, I do carry a Village Cell Phone and do pay for my personal calls on the cell phone. Although, the village does not pay for basic service on a home phone that we were told the village would pay. One-officer carries a personal cell phone with him at all times, I, the Chief, have the number as well as Village Staff and Dispatch. As chief of police my phone starts ringing about 5 in the morning and does not stop until about 11 at night, sometimes it’s through the night. It doesn’t matter if I am on duty or off; it goes with my job. I am there for the people of Cloudcroft. On my cell answering machine, I have always had my home phone number for anyone to call should they not be able to get that cell phone to pick up. If I’m not home, they have always been able to leave a message.
As for citations being down, at one time, we had a fourth officer who brought the citation numbers up, compared to 3 officers. With a 5-year average of 3.8 burglaries, we’ve had 5 burglaries this year and that is including all new subdivisions. I remember times that an officer was out all night long because of certain matters. We have taken a Proactive Approach to the Village instead of a Reactive Approach. We concentrate on patrolling the Village streets instead of staying on the highway issuing citations. If we concentrated on issuing citations all the time, Cloudcroft would be labeled a SPEED TRAP, is this what the COUNCIL MEMBER WANTS? This would really kill the tourism in Cloudcroft, and all businesses would be hurt. Any money from citations written by the Police goes directly into the Villages General Fund, not into the Police Department’s Fund. Most burglaries are in vacation homes going unreported for a minimum of 2 to 3 weeks, this makes solving them next to impossible, as the evidence has been destroyed or contaminated by the time that burglary is reported.
As to responding out side the village assisting the Sheriff’s Department, we can get to the problem much quicker be it a DOMESTIC, A BURGLARY, A DEATH, A MURDER, OR AND OFFICER IN TROUBLE. When this happens, the Sheriff’s Department sends a Deputy from the flats to cover the Village for us. It’s safer this way and this is what you call a Joint Power. We call it; “A Mutual Operation of Understanding”; “All departments working together”.
As for the comment made on the Contract Officer, the Chief of Police was never told to advertise for a Contract Officer. I was told to advertise for a full time officer and did just that. When final budget was prepared, the Police Department was told the Village could not afford that Officer.
As for a DUI, which was commented on in the first editorial, should you drink and drive, we’ll stop you. It does not matter what department does it. Be it the State Police, the Sheriff’s Department or the Village Police Department, we work together to stop what ever it is that is illegal. Remember! We as Police Officer’s are Sworn to Serve and Protect and as a Professional, we never need to set someone up nor do we or anyone for this matter force a person to drink and drive. This is a person’s option. All of the stops done by the Sheriff’s Department and the State Police are on video. This saves accusations as to misappropriate conduct of that officer. The video equipment cost per unit is approximately $5,000.00 dollars installed. Due to the cost, Cloudcroft Police Department does not have this equipment in their units.
As your Chief of Police, should I drink and drive and I’m cited for DUI, I would be put on Administrative Leave immediately not making any decisions until I was cleared, one way or the other. You go figure.
In any high profile job, or life for that matter, you should have integrity and morals, should you not be able to accomadate those duties, especially in a high profile position, ask yourself, SHOULD YOU BE IN THAT POSITION?
Gene Green
Chief of Police
Cloudcroft Police Department
There is a lot of confusion among the people that have read my editorial on the Police Department and Chief Green’s response. I will try to clarify some of the differences so the readers can see what we agree on and what we don’t.
We don’t really disagree on the work schedule. He wrote that he and his deputies work “...a 48-hour shift per officer per week.” And later “Every third week, each officer works an extra 24 hours...” I wrote that they are “...on call an average of 56 hours a week.” If you divide the extra 24 hours the Chief wrote about by every third week it occurs and add it to the 48 hours, you will see we both wrote about 56 hours a week average. The difference is that I refer to it as being “on call” and he refers to it as a “shift.” The actual schedule is that they work two days and then have four days off. That makes it a little hard to explain in terms of weekly work schedules. The bottom line is they are scheduled to work one day out of three. For anything more than that, they are paid overtime.
The real disagreement between the Chief and I comes in a difference on what constitutes work. Chief Green makes it clear he thinks he and his officers should be paid full time for their “48-shift,” which is the two-day shift each officer is either in town or at home on call. I feel that we are already being too generous by paying them 40 hours of full-time for these two days.
To me, being on call does not need to be paid at full-time. The Village has other employees that are on call to care for the water and sewer or to plow the roads when it snows. The electric co-op also has employees on call to get the lines back up if the power fails. Though there may be some sort of compensation for staying available and near a phone, these employees are not paid full-time for just being on call.
I do not see how the Chief can justify full-time pay for he and his deputies while they are home in bed asleep. Surely he does not claim they work 48 hours straight through. If so, they would be so sleep deprived they would be a safety threat to themselves and the public.
To me the real question is what is fair to the tax-paying public. Getting $60,000 a year for a job where you are “on call” one day out of three is just too generous. I think the Chief and anyone who agrees with him on this is taking advantage of the public. Yes I know, the Chief wants to make me and other people in “higher power” out as the bad guys, but I was elected to stand up for the people, and the people are getting a bad deal out of our Police Department.
Gary Wood
Mountain Monthly Editor
For the past few months I have read articles in the Mountain Monthly and the Alamogordo Daily News concerning the Cloudcroft police. I have the impression that all is not well. It was interesting to hear Mr. Wood’s side of the story.
I do not know how the present schedule of “on call” was developed, but it seems to me that it may be best for the police officers but not for the people of Cloudcroft. If I understand the work schedule correctly, the on duty officer being paid a full hourly wage could be asleep in his own bed eight miles away when called to respond to an emergency. Or, and perhaps worse, the responding offcer could be on the 39th hour of a 40 hour shift with only a four hour break to drive home and catch some sleep. That is not someone I would want to call for help in a potentially dangerous or life threatening situation.
The other situations that Mr. Wood diplomatically describes as “attitude problems” sound very close to insubordination to me. In today’s litigious society it can be hard to fire an employee, but I believe refusal to comply with documented requirements is sufficient grounds for termination. Which leads me to my question. Why are the police being allowed to have “attitude problems?" Where is the Village council in this mess and why are they afraid to demand that the taxpayers get their money’s worth?
The Village council needs to be a better boss. The schedules should be arranged so that the people of Cloudcroft get a police force that is actually on duty in a patrol car in the Village during the time the officer is paid full hourly wage. Job requirements should be defined and if an of ficer refuses to comply with policy he should be fired for insubordination.
Going to a contract police force may temporarily solve the problem, but the Village council would still have to monitor the providers and be willing to get tough if the terms of the contract are not being met.
Both sides have aired their side in the media, which has not solved the problem. I think this situation can only be resolved with an independent mediator that could give the Village Council some direction in “tough love” management and the police force guidance in resolving conflict without work slow downs and “attitude problems.”
Patti Greer
Alamogordo
I have a relative who was a Captain in the Albuquerque Police Department on Christmas Eve back in the early 90s. He was in charge of a DWI related accident in which a lady and her four children were killed not to mention that the lady’s husband was horribly injured. This accident is now known as the Gordon House accident. The Captain took it upon himself to personally notify Nadine Milford and her husband of the loss of their daughter and four grandchildren. The APD Captain vividly remembers the grizzly accident scene and could see the tragedy relating it, in his own mind, to his own daughter; what if that had been his own daughter in that accident? That daughter has since provided the former Captain and I with a grandchild to share.
The November issue has two articles that need to be commented upon.
The first concerns the Mayor and his unfortunate DWI. I know Dave and really like him, he appears to be accepting the responsibility for his actions. His unnamed friend would have better served Dave by taking him home that night, but that is water under the bridge. The court hearing and the all too well known DWI Task Force provided video evidence, will tell the story for all to know, concerning the actions of the officer from Ruidoso who made the arrest. I doubt very much that he was targeting a small town political official.
The really great news is the officer involved did not have to deliver really bad news to either Dave’s family or any other family or families over what could have been a different and tragic event, like the accident mentioned above in the first paragraph.
Since the tragic accident above, liquor vendors have been required to obtain “server training” concerning the condition of those who they serve, whether that person is driving or not. The roads in and around the Cloudcroft area are dangerous even for sober folks. It is just a matter of time before tragedy befalls our community if current conditions continue, especially if we “dissolve” our police force. Think of the liability of the Village that “dissolves” it’s police protection.
The second, and related article concerns the unsolved burglaries. You can’t have it both ways. Either the police are doing their jobs or they are not. If you wack them for doing their jobs (the DWI arrest), it doesn’t make much sense to wack them for not doing their jobs (not solving the burglaries). They might be able to solve those burglaries if they had any leads or citizen input to help them.
The Village is doing it’s citizens a tremendous disservice by denigrating and choosing to not support it’s police and their activities to keep the Village safe. I would say the council, the leaders, and former elected officials should choose to quit being part of the problem and choose to become part of the solution.
John Gordon
Cloudcroft
Copyright © 2004 Mountain Monthly - Call us to place an ad: 505-682-2208
|
