City Manager and City Attorney threaten and accuse two P&Z members

by Kathleen Sloan | August 6, 2020
6 min read

The newly-formed City of Truth or Consequences Planning and Zoning Commission has already lost two members.

P&Z Vice Chairperson Dennis Dunnum resigned because of a friend’s and his own illness about a month ago.

P&Z Commissioner Merrill Dicks resigned Aug. 3, the day of the last P&Z meeting, his resignation letter stating he was doing so “in response to thinly veiled threats and unsubstantiated accusations received by certified mail on July 14, 2020 from City Attorney Jaime F. Rubin, City Manager Morris Madrid and Designated Zoning Official Traci Alvarez.”

An Inspection-of-Public-Records-Act request for the resignation letter was fulfilled by the City and included the letter from Rubin, Madrid and Alvarez as an attachment.

Dicks submitted his resignation to P&Z Chairperson Lillis Urban, which she read into the record at the meeting.

The letter sent by Rubin, Madrid and Alvarez was written by Rubin and is addressed to Dicks and Urban at 520 N. Broadway, which is an art gallery with a living space.

The letter opens with the assertion, “Please be advised I represent the City of Truth or Consequences.”

Rubin does not specify who applied for a special use permit to live and work at 520 N. Broadway, but he states the date of the application was July 22, 2018. He submits the application as an exhibit to the letter.

On Sept. 26, 2018, Rubin said Urban spoke before the City Commission and said the business would be open four days a week. Rubin submits meeting minutes as evidence.

“Business has not been substantially conducted since granting of the permit,” Rubin said, without submitting evidence.

Utility bills are sent to “Urban-Dicks Properties,” Rubin said, submitting an unnamed exhibit, supposedly a utility bill.

“During the application process to serve on the P&Z you did not disclose your relationship,” Rubin said, without stating the relationship.

Rubin then lists the City’s “concerns.”

“You have violated the intent of the special use permit,” Rubin said, without submitting the special use permit and its supposed conditions as an exhibit.

“You have created a conflict of interest in the P&Z,” Rubin said, explaining “You have created a perception that you could not protect the City’s interests in making recommendations pertaining to other live/work applications that may come before you.”

“Further,” Rubin said, “the existence of your relationship creates a perception that you could not exercise independent judgement when voting on all matters before the P&Z Commission.”

The letter asks Urban and Dicks to resign from the P&Z and to “vacate the premises at 520 N. Broadway as a residence.”

It also states these “issues must be resolved by the Aug. 3, 2020 meeting.”

The Sierra County Sun asked all members of the City Commission to respond to various questions, with Mayor Pro-tem Brendan Tolley and City Commissioner Randall Aragon replying in time for this article.

Aragon’s response includes the following:

Question 1: How do Madrid and Rubin have the authority to decide the outcome of live/work permits, that is, whether they are withdrawn or not? The final decision is made by the City Commission. Therefore, should not the City Commission decide if live/work permits are withdrawn or not? 

“Ms. Urban initially emailed me then followed up with a telephone call. 
I advised her that I would discuss the letters she received and my thoughts on the matter with Mr. Madrid.  Once I discussed the issue with Mr. Madrid I was advised that somehow this entire matter was going to be resolved administratively. This would entail only one of the spousal members stepping down and due to the Covid-19 concerns that a warning issued related to the ‘live/work’ concerns, followed up by a review/inspection to insure compliance was achieved. I re-contacted Ms. Urban & apprised her of the aforementioned discussion with Mr. Madrid.”

Question 2: The P&Z is formed and approved by the City Commission. How do Madrid and Rubin have the authority to ask for Urban’s and Dicks’s resignations? 

“It appears that both (City Manager & the City Attorney) were attempting to handle this in an administrative manner that would not prove embarrassing for Mr. Dicks and Ms. Urban. They were indeed married and did not reveal such when they were interviewed for their positions on the P&Z board. As I recall both Ms. Urban and Mr. Dicks were indeed highly qualified for the P&Z roles as they had experience with such operations; consequently, from what I understand, in the interest of at least retaining their needed experience, it was decided that only one spouse would be asked to resign: which I concur on that move.”

Question 3: Where is the due process owed to Urban and Dicks, that is, to confront their accusers and to give a reply/defense in a quasi-judicial hearing before a judgement or ruling is passed? 

“I believe this scenario was answered by me in question number 2.”

Question 4: Would you like to add any other comment on the two letters? 

“Once again, it is necessary for subsequent ‘live/work’ conditions to be monitored; warnings issued, and followed up by documented inspections. Those that fail to meet such standards may be asked to vacate. Though not related, as I mentioned at a prior Commission Meeting, when as a Commissioner I am asked to objectively review P&Z decisions for variances and conditional/special use permits  it is only reasonable to have the P&Z Commission to employ a methodical checklist that lists the seven Finding of Facts with the applicable annotations for each factor.  There are seven Finding of Facts for variances (Section 11-2-2) and seven for Special Use Permits (Section 11-5-6). Ms. Urban and I discussed this on her phone call to me: she mentioned that at a previous P&Z meeting that she concurred with my thoughts on this matter and was going to suggest implementing this protocol.”

Tolley’s response to the same questions was as follows:

“Thank you for your questions. At this time I believe there is a lack of clarity surrounding live/work permits that will be addressed at the next City Commission meeting. Authorities need to be clearly defined; right now they are not. 

“I am seeking further information on the other issues. At this time I don’t want to give you inaccurate answers. It is my desire that this will all be clarified and clarified by or during our next meeting.”

State law 3-19-2 states the mayor, with the approval of the governing body, appoints at least five members to serve on the Planning and Zoning Commission.

Removal of a member is addressed in the same law. “After a public hearing and for cause stated in writing and made part of the public record, a mayor with the approval of the governing body may remove a member of the planning commission.”

Therefore it does not appear Rubin, Madrid and Alvarez had the authority to ask for Urban’s and Dicks’s resignations, essentially a behind-the-scenes removal.

Aragon indicates he “advised” Urban. He said he concurred with Rubin’s, Madrid’s and Alvarez’s decision to have only Hicks resign. But he does not have the authority to approve a behind-the-scenes administrative action to remove P&Z members, according to state law.

Under a commission-manager form of city government, the city commission only has authority to act as a body and it can only act while sitting in an open meeting.

Concerning Rubin, Madrid and Alvarez asking Urban and Dicks to vacate the residential portion of the premises, City Code states that is the City Commission’s purview.

City Code 11-2-3 states, “The City Commission shall make all final decisions concerning amendments to this Code, original zoning, re-zoning, variances, appeals, and special use permits, and subdivisions.”

The letter’s assertion that “I represent the City” is also questionable. The City Manager and City Attorney do not have the authority to take over the City Commission’s duties at will. Tolley’s response makes it clear that he was uninformed about their actions. In addition, such issues must be put on an agenda, notifying the public, before they can be addressed by the City Commission.

TAGS: | |
author
Kathleen Sloan is the Sun’s founder and chief reporter. She can be reached at kathleen.sloan@gmail.com or 575-297-4146.
Share this:
HAVE YOU SEEN?

Understanding New Mexico's proposed new social studies standards for K-12 students

“The primary purpose of social studies is to help young people develop the ability to make informed and reasoned decisions for the public good as citizens of a culturally diverse, democratic society in an interdependent world.”
—National Council for the Social Studies 

Reader Michael L. Hayes of Las Cruces commented: What impresses me is that both the proposed standards and some of the criticisms of them are equally grotesque. I make this bold statement on the basis of my experience as a peripatetic high school and college English teacher for 45 years in many states with many students differing in race, religion, gender and socioeconomic background, and as a civic activist (PTA) in public education (My career, however, was as an independent consultant mainly in defense, energy and the environment.)

The proposed social studies standards are conceptually and instructionally flawed. For starters, a “performance standard” is not a standard at all; it is a task. Asking someone to explain something is not unlike asking someone to water the lawn. Nothing measures the performance, but without a measure, there is no standard. The teacher’s subjective judgment will be all that matters, and almost anything will count as satisfying a “performance standard,” even just trying. Students will be left to wonder “what is on the teacher’s mind?” or “have I sucked up enough.”

Four other quick criticisms of the performance standards. One, they are nearly unintelligible because they are written in jargon. PED’s use of jargon in a document intended for the public is worrisome. Bureaucrats often use jargon to confuse or conceal something uninformed, wrong or unworthy. As a result, most parents, some school board members and more than a few teachers do not understand them.

Two, the performance standards are so vague that they fail to define the education which teachers are supposed to teach, students are supposed to learn, and parents are supposed to understand. PED does not define words like “explain” or “describe” so that teachers can apply “standards” consistently and fairly. The standards do not indicate what teachers are supposed to know in order to teach or specify what students are supposed to learn. Supervisors cannot know whether teachers are teaching social studies well or poorly. The standards are so vague that the public, especially parents or guardians, cannot know the content of public education.

Three, many performance standards are simply unrealistic, especially at grade level. Under “Ethnic, Cultural and Identity Performance Standards”; then under “Diversity and Identity”; then under “Kindergarten,” one such standard is: “Identify how their family does things both the same as and different from how other people do things.” Do six-year-olds know how other people do things? Do they know whether these things are relevant to diversity and identity? Or another standard: “Describe their family history, culture, and past to current contributions of people in their main identity groups.” (A proficient writer would have hyphenated the compound adjective to avoid confusing the reader.) Do six-year-olds know so much about these things in relation to their “identity group”? Since teachers obviously do not teach them about these other people and have not taught them about these groups, why are these and similar items in the curriculum; or do teachers assign them to go home and collect this information?

Point four follows from “three”; some information relevant to some performance measures requires a disclosure of personal or family matters. The younger the students, the easier it is for teachers to invade their privacy and not only their privacy, but also the privacy of their parents or guardians, or neighbors, who may never be aware of these disclosures or not become aware of them until afterward. PED has no right to design a curriculum which requires teachers to ask students for information about themselves, parents or guardians, or neighbors, or puts teachers on the spot if the disclosures reveal criminal conduct. (Bill says Jeff’s father plays games in bed with his daughter. Lila says Angelo’s mother gives herself shots in the arm.) Since teacher-student communications have no legal protection to ensure privacy, those disclosures may become public accidentally or deliberately. The effect of these proposal standards is to turn New Mexico schools and teachers into investigative agents of the state and students into little informants or spies.

This PED proposal for social studies standards is a travesty of education despite its appeals to purportedly enlightened principles. It constitutes a clear and present danger to individual liberty and civil liberties. It should be repudiated; its development, investigated; its PED perpetrators, dismissed. No state curriculum should encourage or require the disclosure of private personal information.

I am equally outraged by the comments of some of T or C’s school board members: Christine LaFont and Julianne Stroup, two white Christian women, who belong to one of the larger minorities in America and assume white and Christian privileges. In different terms but for essentially the same reason, both oppose an education which includes lessons about historical events and trends, and social movements and developments, of other minorities. They object to the proposal for the new social studies standards because of its emphasis on individual and group identities not white or Christian. I am not going to reply with specific objections; they are too numerous and too pointed.

Ms. LaFont urges: “It’s better to address what’s similar with all Americans. It’s not good to differentiate.” Ms. Stroup adds: “Our country is not a racist country. We have to teach to respect each other. We have civil rights laws that protect everyone from discrimination. We need to teach civics, love and respect. We need to teach how to be color blind.”

Their desires for unity and homogeneity, and for mutual respect, are a contradiction and an impossibility. Aside from a shared citizenship, which implies acceptance of the Constitution, the rule of law and equality under the law, little else defines Americans. We are additionally defined by our race, religion, national origin, etc. So mutual respect requires individuals to respect others different from themselves. Disrespect desires blacks, Jews or Palestinians to assimilate or to suppress or conceal racial, religious or national origin aspects of their identity. The only people who want erasure of nonwhite, non-Christian, non-American origin aspects of identity are bigots. Ms. LaFont and Ms. Stroud want standards which, by stressing similarities and eliding differences, desire the erasure of such aspects. What they want will result in a social studies curriculum that enables white, Christian, native-born children to grow up to be bigots and all others to be their victims. This would be the academic equivalent of ethnic cleansing.

H.E.L.P.

This postmortem of a case involving a 75-year-old women who went missing from her home in Hillsboro last September sheds light on the bounds of law enforcement’s capacity to respond, especially in large rural jurisdictions such as Sierra County, and underscores the critical role the public, as well as concerned family and friends, can play in assisting a missing person’s search.

Reader Jane Debrott of Hillsboro commented: Thank you for your article on the tragic loss of Betsey. I am a resident of Hillsboro, a friend of Rick and Betsey, and a member of H.E.L.P. The thing that most distresses me now, is the emphasis on Rick’s mis-naming of the color of their car. I fear that this fact will cause Rick to feel that if he had only gotten the facts right, Betsey may have been rescued before it was too late. The incident was a series of unavoidable events, out of everyone’s control, and we will never know what place the correct color of her car may have had in the outcome. It breaks my heart to think that Rick has had one more thing added to his “what ifs” concerning this incident.

Diana Tittle responded: Dear Jane, the Sun undertook this investigation at the request of a Hillsboro resident concerned about the town’s inability to mount a prompt, coordinated response to the disappearance of a neighbor. From the beginning, I shared your concern about how our findings might affect Betsy’s family and friends. After I completed my research and began writing, I weighed each detail I eventually chose to include against my desire to cause no pain and the public’s right to know about the strengths and limitations of law enforcement’s response and the public’s need to know about how to be of meaningful assistance.

There was information I withheld about the state police investigation and the recovery. But I decided to include the issue of the car’s color because the individuals who spotted Betsy’s car emphasized how its color had been key to their identification of it as the vehicle described in Betsy’s Silver Alert. Because the misinformation was corrected within a couple of hours, I also included in this story the following editorial comment meant to put the error in perspective: “The fact that law enforcement throughout the state was on the lookout in the crucial early hours after Betsy’s disappearance for an elderly woman driving a “light blue” instead of a “silver” Accord would, in retrospect, likely not have changed the outcome of the search” [emphasis added].

I would also point to the story’s overarching conclusion about the inadvisability of assigning blame for what happened: “In this case, a perfect storm of unfortunate circumstances, many of them beyond human control, hindered the search that it would fall to Hamilton’s department to lead.”

It is my hope that any pain caused by my reporting will eventually be outweighed by its contribution to a better community understanding of what it will take in the future to mount a successful missing person’s search in rural Sierra County.

Scroll to Top