Truth or Consequences City Commission cuts City Manager loose on equipment-grant spending

by Kathleen Sloan | August 27, 2020
4 min read

The Truth or Consequences City Commission approved a grant application for an unknown amount of grant money, for an unknown amount of City matching funds, which money will go to purchasing City equipment, which also went unnamed and unpriced.

The grant application was approved via a resolution at the Aug. 26 meeting.

There was a public hearing on the U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Development Community Facilities Grant, but since the City packet did not include any information about the grant, it was no surprise there was no public input on the grant application.

City Commissioner Randall Aragon asked City Manager Morris Madrid if the purchase of equipment using the grant money and City matching funds would come back to the City Commission before the purchase was made.

Madrid said no, the resolution gave him authority to accept and spend grant and City money without coming back to the City Commission.

Aragon asked how the City Commission would know what the grant and matching City funds purchased.

Madrid said the equipment purchases might be in financial statements.

The City’s financial statements are part of the City audit, done every year by an independent auditing firm. Such statements are usually released six to eight months after the fiscal year is over. The financial statements and audit findings for the fiscal year just ending, June 30, 2020, will be released around February 2021.

The financial statements and audit findings for the current fiscal year, which started July 1, 2020 and ends June 30, 2021, will be released around February 2022.

Financial statements released more than a year after an equipment purchase is made, which may or may not be included in the financial statement, is therefore not the tool to inform the City Commission on current spending.

Madrid argued he should be given authority to submit applications and accept grant monies on the City’s behalf without City Commission oversight. Sometimes the USDA fund gets unexpected monies and a call for applications goes out, he said. The City would have to move fast to seize the opportunity.

“Each application is usually less than $100,000,” Madrid said, “which cumulatively could add up to hundreds of thousands of dollars” the City would spend in matching funds for equipment.

Madrid said the City applies for the grant every year. It has to put in a 55-percent match most of the time, but sometimes, if the USDA grant fund is flush, only a 45-percent match is required. Police cars automatically get the lower 45-percent match, he said.

City Commissioner Amanda Forrister, three and one-half months in that position, asked Madrid, whom the board is supposed to be overseeing, “Is it standard practice commissions do not get involved with large funds?”

“Yes, fairly standard,” Madrid said. Some City Commissions limit city-manager purchases to $50,000, Madrid said, above which it must come to the City Commission for approval.

The City of Truth or Consequences has no such spending cap on its city manager.

Forrister then asked Madrid “to send us a quick email telling us what we bought,” not requiring Madrid to report in public on how public monies were spent for public equipment.

Aragon said, “I agree. That’s all we want. We just want to know, in case one of our constituents asks about it.”

The City Commission therefore gave over its authority to exercise fiscal oversight on equipment purchases to the City Manager.

According to state law for commission-city manager forms of government, such as Truth or Consequences’, the City Commission’s duties are:

3-14-12. Powers vested in commission; duties of commission.
A.  All powers of the municipality are vested in the commission. The commission shall:
​(1)       pass all ordinances and other measures conducive to the welfare of the municipality;
(2)       perform all acts required for the general welfare of the municipality; and
(3)      in addition to the office of manager, create all offices necessary for the proper carrying on of the work of the municipality.
B.  The commission shall appoint a manager and shall hold him responsible for the proper and efficient administration of the municipal government.

The City Commission didn’t receive or seek enough information to make an informed decision on whether the USDA grant applications will be to the benefit of the people. It is also not requiring the City Manager to demonstrate such equipment purchases will be “proper and efficient” and to the benefit of the community and therefore it is not holding him “responsible.”

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