STOP!

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

Preface:

I don’t want to write about it! I Don’t Want To Write About It!! I DON'T WANT TO WRITE ABOUT IT!!!

I was the Albuquerque Police Officers Association president some 22 years ago and was last a union contract negotiator nine years ago. I have been gone long enough that I had hoped I would not have to write about what is going on in the union. I wouldn’t, except it affects the public, not just the police department or city employees.
I haven’t seen, read, or discussed with anyone the details of the recently ratified APOA contract. The language is of little consequence to why I write today.

Nobody is ever completely satisfied with a collective bargaining contract and there are age-old disputes about how to negotiate. This contract is no different. It’s what happened outside of the police and other city employee contracts that has caught my attention.

Lawrence Torres was appointed Director of Employee Relations by Mayor Martin Chávez in August 2006.

Torres, left, was an open space ranger and had been the chief negotiator for the APOA. His appointment violated ethical standards by allowing him to administer a contract that he had negotiated in his former job. It is not a violation of any city rule or ordinance, because the city has refused to address such issues. In the wider circles of professional public administration, such an ethical lapse would be well defined.

During this year’s round of negotiations, the city has entered into what can only be described as “take it, or leave it” deals with each of its labor unions, without entering into any good faith collective bargaining sessions. Normally, city employee union negotiations take several months to complete. This year, the meetings have not run past a couple of sessions.

The tactic is known as Boulwarism, named after a General Electric management negotiator and company Vice President Lemuel Boulware. He devised a plan for the company to identify and address all the concerns of the workers. His comprehensive research was presented at the opening of the next bargaining session as a “take it, or leave it” proposition as the "first, last and best offer." The International Union of Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers, AFL-CIO (IUE) filed several unfair labor practices and the National Labor Relations Board ruled the tactic improper.
General Electric Co. v. NLRB, 412 F.2d 512 (2d Cir., June 9, 1969)

Boulwarism is illegal. Ironically, Boulware’s financial offers were considered more than fair and outstripped anything offered by the rest of the industry. However, the electrical workers union wanted, but were denied, its opportunity to bargain at the table, not unlike what is currently happening to Albuquerque’s city employee unions.

The city's contract labor negotiator and mayor's education consultant Paul Broome, above, is trying to play the role of Boulware. However, he did none of the research nor had any of the benefits Boulware brought to the electrical union. Broome has only followed Boulwarism to the extent that the city has made a “take it, or leave it” contract offer.

Broome has used strong-arm tactics by telling city unions that it is all about money. He used tactics that were completely contrary to the city's labor ordinance; the requirement that labor put its proposal on the table first. Broome, instead put the "best, last and final" offer on the table. He then used pressure tactics including, that the mayor and department director are impatiently awaiting for the union to wrap it up.

I was going to write a piece about captains being removed from the union by contract last year, but I restrained myself; now seems like a good time to comment on it as an example of how the City is attacking unionism.

The problem stems from the Labor-Management Relations Ordinance and the original philosophies at play. Normally, and specifically in the private sector, supervisors are not allowed to be union members.

As a result of the City’s refuse collectors’ wildcat strike in 1970, blunted by a strong showing of police power, the city hastily wrote a labor law. This event was, for city union workers, the equivalent of the Boston Tea Party. It marked a change. However, even though the city agreed to negotiate with its employees, the ordinance the city drafted was far from a “good faith” attempt to deal fairly with the employees.

The City Commission defined supervisors:

Supervisors. …In the Police and Fire Departments, chiefs, deputy chiefs, and assistant chiefs are the only employees classified as supervisors.
('74 Code, § 2-2-3) (Ord. 153-1971; Am. Ord. 4-1977)

The operative word was “only.” Neither a union nor the city, separately or collectively, may ignore or rewrite a City Ordinance. In past contracts, union membership was defined as all “permanent, full-time, non-probationary, sworn police officers through the rank of Captain, from APD, Aviation, and Open Space.” This simply is another violation of the ordinance. The city and union redefined captains by calling them commanders. The change did not make the captains/commanders part of the excluded group: chiefs, deputy chiefs, or assistant chiefs.

Now there are reports that Sergeant Paul Heh, who was openly dissatisfied with the terms of the contract, is being investigated for "conduct unbecoming of an officer," by the APD Internal Affairs unit that is looking into complaints of intimidation over voting for the contract.

The APOA negotiating team made a presentation to its members on Thursday, March 13, using a PowerPoint slide program with all the purported language changes.

The Eye on Albuquerque has blogged extensively on this issue and the backside comment pages have had a lively discussion. Charges and counter charges ranged from why younger officers should get the lion’s share of the money to how longevity pay was going to be removed.

One of the common threads during the discussion is that there was not a complete contract available for review.

Some, including Heh, have charged that not having a complete copy of a tentatively agreed upon contract had never been done this way before. That’s one of those things, the statement “it never happened before,” that really bothers me. It has happened before and a lot of other things happened also. Almost every APOA negotiating team has presented proposed contracts in as many different ways as imaginable. I watched them all, while I was there; sometimes they had copies of full language, sometimes they didn’t.

Currently a ratification vote commenced immediately following the presentation with polls closing 36 hours later. The results were for acceptance by a vote of 366-307.

However, there were several items of concern raised:
Probationary officers were allowed to vote on this contract.

If true, this is a violation of the labor ordinance about the makeup of the bargaining unit as mirrored in the language: “non-probationary” members.

Chief Ray Schultz, center, speaking with field services officers after the Feb. 2, Hillary Clinton rally, announced in March, after the contract ratification vote, that he was changing Field Services Officers’ work schedule from four ten-hour days to five eight-hour days.

So what’s wrong with this picture?

This isn’t the first time city employees have been unhappy with contracts. Police Chief Gerald Galvin is surrounded by picket signs as he sat at the back of a 2000 City Council meeting where police officers gathered to protest the negotiations process.

Sgt. Heh spoke out at the April 8, 2008, City Council meeting. Heh is absolutely protected by the First Amendment for off duty comments about a matter of public concern. Immediately after the meeting, Heh was hand served with a target letter from Internal Affairs.

The existing contract specifically delineates how a target letter will be delivered.

“Section 23. Administrative Investigations
D. The officer shall be informed of the nature of the investigation before any interrogation commences. Prior to any administrative interview being conducted sufficient information shall be disclosed to reasonably apprise the officer of the allegations. This information will be provided to the target officer(s) in writing via certified US Mail. Through the course of the investigation, additional issues of concern may arise that may be incorporated into the investigation.”

There is a prohibition against parties and individuals becoming involved with the negotiations process in the Labor-Management Relations Ordinance.

§ 3-2-9 Prohibited Practices.
(C) It shall be a prohibited practice for any elected or appointed official of the city government or for any employee organization, group of city employees or individual city employee to attempt to influence negotiations or to interfere with the normal progress of negotiations between the duly authorized negotiating teams of the city government and of the employee organization.

One might think that both Sgt. Heh and the City Councillors violate the language of this ordinance. One would be right. However, if you will recall the first five words of the First Amendment, “Congress shall make no law…” That now includes the City Council, which “shall make no law… abridging freedom of speech…

This is City Attorney Bob White at a 1999 City Council meeting when then APOA President Alex Marentes and Vice President Paul Pacheco, who were challenged by then Council President Vicki Perea. Perea quoted the prohibited practice, but White warned her off with the First Amendment.

Apparently there is an accusation that Heh and possibly some other senior sergeants or veteran officers intimidated younger members of the APOA to vote against the contract. It is these accusations of intimidation that sparked Internal Affairs investigations.

This is where the title of this post comes into play: STOP!

This allegation is a union matter, to be resolved within the union, by the union.

If the chief believes that the alleged intimidation is more serious than a violation of the Standard Operating Procedure, then he should handle it as a criminal matter.

There are at least two problems with that:
APD’s criminal investigators, like their counterparts at Internal Affairs, are members of the bargaining unit and there is a built in conflict of interest that can not be overcome within the department.
There has been an allegation, if only a rumor, that non-union administrators, commanders or a deputy chief may have been present at a polling place and possibly looked over the shoulder of officers while casting a ballot.

With such allegations, it would be improper for APD to conduct such an investigation.

There is an irony associated with the idea that senior members of the association might intimidate younger members. When the old City Commission accepted the city’s human resources’ department’s draft language that became the Labor-Management Relations Ordinance in the early 1970’s, it chose to include all officers except the executive levels of chief, assistant chief and deputy chiefs. The thinking, according to John Martinez, who was at one time Director of Personnel and Employee Relations Department and the person who was intimately involved in all things related to labor relations at the city, was that police captains were included in the bargaining in part so they could exert a calming effect on younger and potentially more bold officers.

It now seems the opposite is occurring, with the allegation that senior members are influencing younger ones through rash acts.

Sgt. Heh has retained attorney John D'Amato, who is suspicious of the timing of the Internal Affairs’ target letter.

The City Council does not play a direct role in labor negotiations. They can become involved in two ways. The Council has a Guidelines Committee.

§ 3-2-17 Guidelines Committee.

(A) To facilitate communication and coordination between the Mayor and the City Council concerning collective bargaining strategy, there is created a Guidelines Committee composed of three City Councillors appointed by the Council President and three members of the Mayor's staff, one of whom shall be the Chief Administrative Officer. The Guidelines Committee shall, in accordance with the New Mexico Open Meetings Act, promulgate rules to effectuate the purposes of this section.

(B) The Guidelines Committee shall meet in closed session with appropriate staff in accordance with the New Mexico Open Meetings Act as necessary to discuss bargaining strategy preliminary to collective bargaining negotiations between the city and employee organizations.

(C) At the time negotiations are opened, the Guidelines Committee shall entertain a presentation from the employee organization involved in the subject collective bargaining negotiations summarizing its positions and proposals in the upcoming negotiations so the Guidelines Committee may be fully informed. The Guidelines Committee shall not otherwise meet to hear or entertain presentations by employee organizations of collective bargaining proposals, counter proposals, grievances or any other issue related to employee/labor relations except that the Mayor may ask the Guidelines Committee to convene upon the Board entering a finding that a strike has occurred.

The second involvement of the Council is a function of the budget process. When a contract exceeds the budget or there is a multi-year contract with pay increases, the Council must specifically approve those raises.

The Council, through its own ordinances, has determined that it will not become involved in the process, especially including grievances such as Heh’s.
My Take

It doesn’t seem like almost nine years, but it is; on November 8, 1999, I spoke at the Police Oversight Commission meeting and caused quite a stir because my attorney, Paul Livingston, and I had just had a District Court Judge rule that the POC illegally conducted meetings in violation of the State’s Open Meetings Act.

An IA investigation ensued. I videotaped the session. My attorney, Livingston, right, was assaulted and thrown to the floor by IA Sgt. John Gallegos, left. I touched Gallegos on the shoulder to try to calm him down and I was pushed against the wall. Ultimately, I was fired and criminally charged with battery.

Over the next year, there were four hearings scheduled:
An unemployment hearing with the State; the City failed to appear.
A Labor-Management Relations Board hearing, which ruled that the department had violated several sections of the union contract and recommended that the department withdraw the criminal charge and reinstate me.
The criminal battery charge, that a Metropolitan Court Judge dismissed at the end of the state’s case, with a strong admonition that it was the worse interrogation/interview he had ever seen.
A personnel hearing was scheduled, but the day before it commenced, the City asked to enter into mediation.

I was fully restored and my record was cleansed. I took a large monetary settlement and chose to end my 24 and half years with APD by retiring.

Two of the four players in my event are now lurking in the shadows of Heh’s case: Chief Schultz, left, was my Captain at the time. He said nothing and eventually, when Chief Galvin and Deputy Chief Bill Weiland refused to tell me I was fired, it fell to Schultz to deliver Galvin's termination letter. Then Lt. Michael Callaway, right, who is now a Deputy Chief, was heading Internal Affairs.

Why my history is of any significance here is that the heavy footsteps towards Heh sound very familiar.

It seems like nobody, either on the city's side or among the union leadership, bothers to read, let alone follow the ordinances, existing contracts or rules on how to enter the negotiations through the established collective bargaining process.

This is the hand of former, long time, City Councilor Vince Griego at the first publicly opened Council Guidelines Committee. The committee only opened the meeting because the union leaders, at the far end of the table, demanded access and threatened to force their way in. Griego, initially objected to the meeting being photographed, but relented when he was made aware that the committee was subject, like all other council meetings, to the State's Open Meetings Act.

The current Council did not hear from unions because the opening process was subverted.

There is no doubt in my mind that the root of this problem is the dysfunctional nature of the almost 40-year old Labor-Management Relations Ordinance. I have repeatedly called on the city to overhaul the labor relations ordinance, but it has always fallen on deaf ears.

Where the Deer and the Antelope Play

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

This Pronghorn Antelope was photographed a few years ago in the area of Northeastern New Mexico where rancher Neal Trujillo shot 39 of its species, recently near Cimarron.

It is legal in New Mexico to shoot wildlife that destroys crops, livestock or other property.

Senate Pro Tem Tim Jennings, left, a rancher himself, shepherded legislation through a few years back setting up the program.

So what’s wrong with this picture?

Trujillo made a mess of it by using a shotgun and riding an all terrain vehicle to shoot the fastest land mammals in North America. He tended to maim them and leave them to agonizingly die.

State Game and Fish Department officers found some of the injured animals later and had to put them out of their misery.

No doubt animals compete with the rancher over his crop of winter wheat and he is authorized to protect his investment by killing the animals as a last resort. However, Trujillo seems to consider himself immune from the obligation to do anything else before arriving at the last resort and then he literally adds insult to the injury by not being humane in his efforts.

Though it is lawful to kill predators, a quick read of the state statute on cruelty to animals shows there are requirements in the authorization such destruction. The important language in the "lawful justification" section is “humanely destroying a sick or injured animal.”

I’m not widely regarded as a “jump up and down while foaming at the mouth,” kind of animal protection guy. I appreciate wildlife and like to observe it; I’m not a hunter, but I won’t turn down a piece of venison either.

I understand the need to knock down wild animals that get too close to humans.

I watched with interest this week as Chicago Police tracked down a fairly large cougar and quickly shot it.

There are those who have called for the use of a tranquilizer, but such folks have no idea how quick and dangerous such an animal is and how slowly a tranquilizer takes affect.

What I find reprehensible here is the lack of engaging in a humane effort. I would have no problem if the state were to charge Trujillo with cruelty or even extreme cruelty to animals; which is defined as, intentionally or maliciously torturing, mutilating, injuring or poisoning an animal.

Not because he killed them, but specifically because, when Trujillo shot the antelopes, he didn't kill them.

If you’re going to put them down, then do a full job of it.

Justice Works

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

A Bernalillo County Metropolitan Court jury found University of New Mexico student and Air Force veteran Peter Lynch, 31, guilty of a misdemeanor count of criminal destruction of private property on Wednesday.

Lynch removed and destroyed a Mexican flag that was inadvertently left to fly over the weekend at the University’s administration building. The flag was raised during a ceremony on Friday Sept. 14, 2007, recognizing Mexican Independence Day on the coming Sunday. At the end of the day, an Air Force ROTC flag detail failed to lower the flag, believing the sponsors of the independence-day event would remove it. They didn’t.

On Monday, the Mexican flag was still flying and because of a further communication error, a different military ROTC unit’s flag detail that had just started a new monthly rotation, the flags in front of Scholes Hall were not raised.

Lynch attempted to bring what he saw as a violation of the flag code to the attention of university officials. When the UNM administration did not immediately respond, he took it upon himself to remove the flag. He destroyed the flag and presented it to UNM Air Force Studies commander, Lt. Col. Curtis Johanson. I observed Lynch yelling at Johanson, trying to catch his attention and moments later, running the opposite direction across campus.

Metropolitan Court Judge Clyde DeMersseman, left, sentenced Lynch to: six-months probation, 48-hours of community service, completion of an anger management course, and was ordered to pay restitution; the cost of the destroyed flag.

Lynch was ordered to replace the flag as part of an administrative process conducted by UNM, as a condition to continue in good standing as a student.

One of the sponsors of the on-campus celebration of the Mexican Independence Day event and owners of the destroyed flag, “El Centro de la Raza” –The Center for the Race– claimed that Lynch committed a hate crime.

So what’s wrong with this picture?

Justice works.

With the finding of the six-person jury, the arguments made by Lynch, that his destroying the Mexican flag was a lawful act because he was protecting the American flag and El Centro de la Raza’s claim of a hate crime, were tempered.

The jury seems to have gotten it right. They looked at the case as a destruction of property. The politics that have attached to this incident were not allowed to cloud the verdict. Lynch took property that was not his and destroyed it. He admitted to doing so, through his lawyer’s opening statement, and was found guilty.

He wishes, even after being sentenced, to try to excuse his actions by claiming to be a patriot.

He and his supporters continue to claim that the Mexican flag flying by it self violates federal law. Not true.

The flag code of the United States is not a criminal law. It is, at best: a guide, a mere suggestion or protocol. I am continually amazed that people who yell loudest about some “unpatriotic display” sometimes wrap themselves in the flag in violation of the same flag code.

A motorcycle group led by an old law enforcement buddy, Paul Caputo, who is a former Marine, rode to the swearing in ceremony of UNM President David Schmidly, to present him with an American flag. Members of the group made statements that they might engage in a demonstration if Schmidly were to snub them. Instead, Schmidly met and accepted the flag. Ironically, as seen in Daily Lobo photographer Javier Zamora’s picture, Schmidly wore a tie covered with American flags; a violation of the flag code.

There are too many comments on blogs and websites that are simply wrong on the meaning of the flag code and the law, to address them all.

Here are some examples of claimed flag code violations:
The American flag does not fly above any other nation’s flag, as claimed; they fly at the same level. The American flag flies to the far left when facing the display.

Veteran David Ethridge watches President Schmidly give a television interview. The display of the flag on Ethridge’s coat is a violation of the flag code.

Many question why the Lynch case arrived in court anyways? Part of the answer is found in the juxtaposition of Lynch’s own words. Many commenters point out that Lynch offered El Centro a replacement flag and a purported apology. Yet after the trial Lynch was still making statements that were inconsistent with a sincere apology.

El Centro described the original flag as, “an irreplaceable gift from a former student,” and did not accept Lynch’s offerings.

Analysis

The issues surrounding this event are very personal to those involved. Lynch was offended by what he saw as disrespecting the American flag. It bothered him so much that in his words to UNM police, he became overzealous.

Centro de la Raza felt that Lynch’s actions were a hate crime and sought prosecution as an illegal discrimination.

It was a simple act that constituted two crimes – theft and vandalism. Lynch was charged with only one crime – destruction of private property.


Several people have tried to link this event with the US Supreme Court’s ruling declaring desecration of an American flag as an unconstitutional violation of free speech. In that case, a young man, protesting the Republican National Convention in Dallas, burned an American flag that had been stolen from a pole in front of a city building. He was charged with a Texas state statute for desecration of a venerated object, the American flag. In the ruling’s footnotes, the decision points out that the young man had only been charged with the desecration; not for trespass, disorderly conduct, or arson.
Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397, Brennan, William J., Justice, (June 21, 1989) United States Supreme Court.

In Lynch’s Metropolitan Court petty misdemeanor case, he was not charged with desecration but vandalism, which seemed to be an acceptable charge under the Johnson Supreme Court ruling.

My Take

Politics aside, this is a simple case.

Had Lynch simply removed the flag and presented it to some university official, there would have been: no issue, no crime, no trial, no problem, and no debate.

Politics aside? Not likely. This event pushed too many buttons. It struck nerves for so many different people. It showed some of the great divides that our community is currently suffering. It didn’t bring out the best nature of our country.

Xenophobia, hate, intolerance, distrust, fear, false-patriotism, misunderstanding and ignorance are only some of the negative emotions that are brought to light.

The jury in the criminal justice system is a remarkable concept. People, who live in the community, are aware of what happens around them. They collectively bring experience, wisdom, reason and order to the question of guilt or innocence.

They got it right. After a trial, the presentation of evidence, witnesses and cross examination, they weighed Lynch’s right to confront his accusers and right to testify; though he chose not to take the stand, his attorney capably represented him and made his argument abundantly clear. The jury decided in less than a half-hour of deliberation.

In the end, those who wanted it got their day in court. Neither got their way. Lynch’s “patriotism” defense did not excuse his act. For the owners of the flag, Lynch’s act was not seen as a “hate crime.”

The controversy offers an opportunity for our community to talk about the issues that this event sparked. There is a divide that the jury’s finding is not currently closing.

Several posted comments on other blogs, have equated the celebration of Mexican Independence with the participants being illegal immigrants. Some suggest that members of Centro de la Raza are somehow either not citizens of the United States or are not entitled to express their pride, feelings, or perceived grievances through a group that refers to itself as “the race.” It seems that some folks are offended by the groups name and express anti-Hispanic rants, including being barred from the campus and deported. There was no indication that any illegal immigrants attended the Mexican Independence Day celebration. To the contrary, the campus events seemed to be attended by foreign, Hispanic and other students. Even I paused to listen to a band play on the plaza.

There are a few side issues worth mentioning:

I observed Lynch, the morning of the flag incident, running around the campus yelling. It had been my thought, that if I were still a uniformed police officer, he and I would have had a conversation to ascertain his behavior. In hindsight, it was pretty clear; angry, emotionally upset, but probably not mentally disturbed.

Lynch had been in the Air Force just 72-hours prior to this incident. I am glad that he no longer is in the military, as he is, what senior pilots say about young bold pilots, ”All airspeed – no azimuth.” He is all about passion, but with no discipline. He’s the kind of guy that will act brashly at the sight of the opposition’s point guard and attack instead of waiting for the full body to expose itself. Such premature actions could endanger fellow troops and give the enemy an opportunity to counter act. It is good that he is in school, because he might learn something about the flag that he had not learned as a 7-year old cub scout.

What had to be the most devastating witness in the case was UNM Air Force Studies commander, Col. Johanson. He is seen here, center, during the re-raising of the Mexican flag, held the following week as an expression of the University’s dedication to accepting foreign students in the campus community.

Johanson, on the stand, represented silently the position of military personnel and their philosophical regard for differences amongst people in our country: acceptance, tolerance, understanding, and restraint. It had been Johanson who had called UNM police about the incident.

Johanson is an Air Force Academy graduate, 22-year career officer. He wore his flight suit to court with embroidered patches on it including his: unit patch, name, rank and pilot’s wings, and an American flag. I don’t know his resume, but as a C-130 transport pilot, I doubt that he has not seen combat; he would be hard pressed to have missed it.

My buddy Sgt. Joe Schmedlap, in a posted comment on the Eye on Albuquerque rightly points out:

“Historically notable, the land where that flag was flying at UNM was part of the Republic of Texas from 1836-1845 based upon the Treaties of Velasco between the Texas republic and Mexico. In 1852 it was ceded by Texas to the US Federal government in return for the assumption of debt owed by Texas.”

The fact raises a question; why won’t New Mexico, and Albuquerque in particular, recognize the fact that between Texas independence and the end of the Mexican American War, when the current borders of New Mexico were realigned with Texas, half of what is now New Mexico was Texas?

On Albuquerque’s Old Town Plaza, there is a flag display purporting to show the flags of nations under which the city was ruled. They are Spain, Mexico, Confederate States of America, the United States of America, and the State of New Mexico. Interestingly, why is the Republic of Texas flag conspicuously missing?

The Albuquerque Journal posed an unscientific on-line poll asking the question, “Did Peter Lynch receive an appropriate penalty for destroying a Mexican flag?”

The majority, or 62.3 percent, of the 962 people participating in the week-long poll agreed with the answer, “Should have gotten a medal instead,” with 621 respondents.

The other options were: “About right for what he did,” of which there were 256 responses for 26.1 percent and “Not enough of a punishment,” received 105 responses for 10.7 percent.

In the very formulation of the response, the Journal exposes its seldom seen, but often perceived ethnic bias against Hispanics and in particular, Mexican students at UNM.

The final thought is that the flag is a symbol; meaning different things to different people and a perceived insult to one who considers them self a patriot, does not authorize or excuse violating another law. It is the symbol of “We the People.” All the people who are in the country, whether some welcome all of them or not.


The flag code should not be taken so seriously, because it is inconsistent with the First Amendment’s guarantee of free expression. It should not bother a true patriot, wrapped in the flag, when someone expresses their displeasure by destroying or burning a flag that they own.

To do otherwise would just be un-American.

It Is What It Is

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

Sometimes, I just can’t seem to overcome gravity.

In my last posting about the first signs of spring. I wrote that we would soon be complaining about how hot it was. I forgot about allergy season. However, allergy season didn’t forget about me. I was laid low the past few days. The antihistamines are not my friend. though they do clear my head and replace it with fuzziness.

It seems like everything thing needs repair. The computer needed more memory to run a new program; the display monitor blew an inverter. The estimated repair is more expensive than a new monitor. A camera also went down. Those were just the big-ticket items.

It just seemed like one thing after another ganging up to make things difficult.

I know better than to say we’re through with that, but maybe we can move on.

So what’s wrong with this picture?

While I was waiting for my pickup to be repaired several weeks back, I was looking through a Sports Illustrated that had a short piece in the Newsmakers SI Players page on the use of the phrase, “It is what it is.”

The story was about Congressional testimony by Yankees trainer Brian McNamee’s taped conversation with Pitcher Roger Clemens concerning telling the truth about alleged steroid or growth hormone usage. McNamee said, “It is what it is,” euphemistically to mean ‘the truth is the truth,” according to the SI report.

SI goes on with other examples of sports figures who’ve used the phrase and speculates as to what the actual meaning might have been, “In other words.”

One of the examples was:

“New Mexico offensive tackle Claude Terrell, after the Lobos accepted a bid for the 2004 Emerald Bowl. ‘It is what it is.’ And we’ve just got to make the most of it. In other words: I should have gone to USC.”

Terrell was in my History of the Media class and was quit erudite. On the field, he was a very good strong tackle. Above, in the number 76 jersey, Terrell leads Sophomore Dontrell Moore, 22, to his single season school rushing record during the November 15, 2003 game against Air Force. Quarterback Casey Kelly, on the right, called the play and handed off to Moore for his record run in a game the Lobos won 24-12.

Terrell and the rest in the SI story may be right, as far as my lack of posting goes, “it is what it is.”

Spring? Maybe

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

I don’t know from Phil; that 120 year-old Groundhog who makes his home at the Punxsutawney Groundhog Club.

Five weeks ago, Feb. 2, he came out of his hole and supposedly saw his shadow. According to central Pennsylvania lore, that means we will have a short winter.

So what’s wrong with this picture?

Here is the first evidence of spring in Albuquerque.

This flowering tree is directly across Central Avenue at Buena Vista Drive S.E., from where I photographed the last of blooming flowers, as the last remnants of summer, late in November on the University campus.

So the overgrown rodent might be right, not only for the East, but also for the Southwest.

I won’t take any bets that New Mexico’s winter season is done, but it’s nice to know that the trees, at least, have had enough of the cold.

Next thing you know, it’ll be time to complain how hot it is.

200th Blog

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

This is my 200th blog posting!

I started this site as part of a university class project. It seems an appropriate time to review how I have gotten this far.

I have not adopted all the options of Web logging, better known as blogging, technology. Actually, I chose to ignore and even outright reject some of them. I guess I’ve just become that old dog, hesitant to learn the new tricks.

I’m a news junkie and am powerless over my addiction.

I started as a storyteller who eventually gravitated to print. The first time I saw my name in print was in the Rosendale Elementary School, Niskayuna, N.Y., June 1959, newsletter.

Mrs. Breymaier’s 2nd Grade

TEXAS, HERE I COME

My family and I are moving to Amarillo, Texas Airforce Base soon. We have some booklets about Amarillo and places near it. We read sometimes at supper time. Amarillo is a large city. Nearby are oil wells. Twenty five miles away from the city is a canyon. They have a rodeo each year. I’m looking forward to seeing it next year. I am sorry I have to leave Schenectady, but I’m sure I will have a good time in Texas.

Mark Bralley

This is the school in 2001. In 1959, I helped plant these trees with my Cub Scout Pack.

Probably, little has changed, in either my writing style or journalistic philosophy. It has matured a little with my increased vocabulary and education. However, in spite of that, I’m sure I still need an editor.

I wasn’t initially hooked. In Amarillo, I got newsprint all over my hands by flinging the Air Force Times on doorsteps all over base housing. There must be something about the absorption of newsprint ink through skin contact. Several of my media colleagues have expressed similar beginnings, as newspaper delivery entrepreneurs.

I have usually worked within the smaller recesses of the print medium.

I was in the eighth grade when I started as a Stratford Jr. High School newspaper and yearbook photographer. This was my introductory photograph in the 1965 yearbook the Cavalier.

My first Journalism teacher was Mrs. Ruth Silcox, second from the right, in the middle row of this 1965 yearbook photo. It was simple enough; the old who, what, when, where and how. She oversaw the publications and let the students make them work. I never sensed that she was controlling or engaged in censorship. It wasn’t her style and though I’m sure she did censor us a bit, her control went unnoticed. She instilled professionalism from the start. My other mentor of the mid 1960’s was an adult Boy Scout leader, National Geographic Society’s Director of Photography Bob Gilka. He was my merit badge counselor for photography and citizenship in the community. Little did I know how much influence he would have on my life’s work.

I found that the local newspaper was always looking for anything the editor could justify as news, to fill the white space that became a newspaper day after day, every day.

I now marvel at the simplicity of my entrée to a community newspaper, The Northern Virginia Sun, in Arlington, Va. It started with two-inch box scores from local Jr. High basketball games.

I learned valuable lessons from this. Anything can be news and everything is news to some people. The participants, fellow-students, and parents of those basketball players, all wanted the information. Though, by today’s standards, the idea that a small daily paper would print junior high sports scores is rare. It was equally surprising that they printed a student taken photo of the county junior high school champion football team and ran it across more than half a page of the sports section. What it taught me was that it was about an acceptable level of work.

The team picture was also used in the school's yearbook.

Over the years, I have seldom pursued the “Big Story,” favoring instead to show, photographically, the every-man story. Yet, it has always been about showing others my world, through how I photograph it.

After arriving in Albuquerque in 1966, I went on to regularly be published in the Highland High School newspaper, the Highlight and yearbook, the Hornet. My yearbook sponsor was Bill Manier, right. He provided significant support and encouragement. My Journalism class teacher and newspaper sponsor was Betty Chowning.

I also freelanced for the Journal, Tribune and the wire services: Associated Press and United Press International. I wasn’t given assignments; I just threw pictures of news or sporting events on editors’ desks and asked if they wanted to use them. Seldom was I rejected and when I was, it usually was because some major news event dominated that day’s paper.

I was not very comfortable with the daily newspaper’s deadline requirements and never pursued employment with the Journal or Tribune. However, I had a love-hate relationship with the Journal. I had a highly competitive association with lead photographer, Ray Cary, center, here with photographer Greg Sorber, who is now the assistant photo editor. I had routinely beaten Cary in press award competitions. Cary told me the day I took this photograph in 1978, it was good I found a career in law enforcement, because though I was a great photographer, I had no people skills and that was why he had never hired me. My response was direct, rude and proof positive he was right; that at least with him, I had no people skills.

I photographed land grant leader Reies Lopez Tijerina, right, for eight days in June 1969, which ended in his arrest for assaulting Federal Forest Service Law Enforcement Officer James Evans. This picture was published in the Dec. 15, 1969, issue of Newsweek magazine.

I attended New York Institute of Photography in New York City during the fall of 1969. I took a photojournalism workshop with the former Life magazine photographer W. Eugene Smith, above left.

Every day I rode the Staten Island Ferry, above, with newspaper readers to Manhattan, below. The New York skyline of lower Manhattan included the World Trade Center under construction, left, the building with cranes on top of it.

I became a regularly employed photographer for the Albuquerque News. I went on to expand into larger media. I learned radio news, film for television news, shot stills for magazines and became involved with some political campaigns.

I photographed for a Capitol Hill news agency in Washington, D.C. Then in 1973, I took a sudden career shift into law enforcement. I continued to occasionally photograph. I did public relations and evidentiary photography as a deputy sheriff and police officer.

I was assigned to the police department’s video productions unit that brought my journalistic skills to the duties. I videotaped the U.S. Supreme Court’s photographer while collecting stock footage, during a 1993 vacation trip to Washington, D.C.

In the mid 1990s, I started to seriously return to journalistic photography, though I did so on the smallest of markets. I also began pamphleteering with “The Blue Flyer,” my personal thoughts and observations in a pre-Internet age.

I wrote and photographed for the police union when we started a monthly magazine, APOA Review, and made video packages for a public access cable channel program, APOA Forum.

After retirement, I returned to the university, taking the journalism track. I’ve been learning what I call “new” technology with students who grew up never knowing anything except computers.

So what’s wrong with this picture?

I have a long history with commercial media, albeit from the fringes. However, even through the occasional day-to-day work I’ve had published, I get to sneak a peek at the inner workings of the news industry. I may be on the dull side of the knife’s cutting edge, but I move between the academic and active press corps worlds.

I have reflected on what I have produced in a little less than two years.

I’ve approached this site as if it were a blank sheet of paper. Rather than thinking in terms of blogging, I have chosen my own path. This is different from the many that have developed their own sites, in what might be perceived as some kind of collective standard.

Many want blogs to be short, quick, and easy reads. Some sites are designed to be very interactive. Though I welcome comments and discussions, I seldom generate them.

I started my blog spot with only a few premises:
I have a large archive of photographs; many of which have never been published.
A number of those old photographs can help put today's issues into a historical context.
Topics of current events oftentimes are not new.

Over time, it became apparent that taking a strict journalistic approach seemed to make little sense. The biggest reason is that when I was not always doing original reporting, I was bringing some other viewpoint to the stories. Sometimes I have a particular insight that I think my readers should consider.

Therefore, I divide the entries into multiple parts. Though there are no hard and fast rules. The posting generally follows a pattern of reporting, or fact statement, using the strict journalistic style. I follow with an analysis, then a dose of editorial, and sometimes, under the heading of “My Take,” my personal view of the issue.

Based on my photographs, I often try to introduce my readers to newsmakers.

I follow the cliché of sporting program hawkers. They sell their wares by saying, “you can’t tell the players without a program.”

Through the use of my working portraits, I attempt to bring a flavor of the person and the events I cover. Sometimes I will only use an archived image to introduce a person involved in the blogged issue.

I've found that I post a number of obituaries. They have included: Associated Press photographer Joe Rosenthal who was awarded the 1945 Pulitzer Prize for photography for his picture of Marines raising the American flag on Mount Suribachi, Iwo Jima. Also Albuquerque City Clerk and community activist Emelia “Millie” U. Santillanes, Deputy Chief of Police Jerry T. Powell and former President Gerald R. Ford.

Over the years, I developed some degree of expertise in several different fields including: hot air ballooning and a number of law enforcement skills. Expertise is a perishable skill and I have lost some them through the lack of continued use. However, the knowledge still serves me well.

Based on my experiences, I attempt to bring an informed analysis to, in particular: local and state government, politics, law enforcement and the media.

My site will continue to be photo driven. The web offers me an audience that is much broader than when I first started photographing and I had to show individual prints to one person at a time.

Blogging is a new communications form. There are good and bad things about it. Anyone with access to a computer can play. Some critics complain that blogging is destroying newspapers. Bunk! Bad newspapers are destroying bad newspapers. The immediacy available through blogging seems to be important to younger people these days. For some, it is not the facts, but the interaction that is important. To old dogs, facts still count. There is an ease provided in spreading the message through the Internet. There are good and bad in not having the structure of a newspaper, editors, and colleagues to help shape the direction of one’s work.

My favorite Constitutionalist, James Madison and his public marketplace of ideas, lives on with the Internet. Any blogger may post their ideas and by being out there, any other blogger may challenge those ideas, or agree, or offer some alternative thought. The discussion can be worldwide. Who would have thought I would have readers in Sri Lanka, or Japan, or other far-east countries.

Blogging has its own rewards. More than a couple of state legislators have told me that they had not considered a topic from my perspective and they then looked at an issue differently. How much more can you expect to get than participation in the public discussion?

Several fellow journalists have told me that I have turned them on to follow up on stories I broke.

There are some downsides to blogging. I have had to bill some bloggers who have simply stolen some of my copyrighted photographs and posted them on their site. Many who blog feel that the Internet is just a big free for all. They don’t have the decency to consider other peoples work and lift whole pieces, posting them as their own. It is technically so easy to take work and post it on one’s own site that it is done with impunity. It jazzes up a lot of otherwise boring sites, but it is nothing more than thievery. Just because one gives credit does not absolve them from the infringement of copyright laws. There seems to be an accepted sense that the proper way is to cite and link to the original information. The good bloggers do so; the bums engage in rip-offs.

This picture of State Land Commissioner Pat Lyons, during his 2006 reelection campaign, was stolen by an otherwise respected local blogger, who is not alone.

There are the bloggers who write anonymously, either out of fear of being retaliated against because they are whistleblowers or they can’t stand the heat. I can respect those who take such stands. The authors: Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, wrote the Federalist Papers, anonymously under the name Publius.

Then there are the bloggers and more specifically those who write comments anonymously and then are rude or worse, libelous. These folks are cowards. If someone disagrees with some idea on the Internet, they should have the guts to stand up and say, "this is who I am and I disagree," or "You’re full of it and here’s why." However, those anonymous posters who make personal attacks don’t deserve any recognition and most don’t get much attention from me.

There is a blogger, who has poked at me writing as Sgt Joe Schmedlap’s world. He claims to have been a command officer in the largest New Mexico police department; that would be my old outfit, the Albuquerque Police Department. He further claims, about himself, “I was horribly altered by growing up in the 70's surrounded by cheap Mexican weed and listening to Warren Zevon.” He took a fair amount of umbrage at my sarcastic and cynical review of an absolutely absurd idea to publish gangsters’ pictures in the local newspapers.

This anonymous blogger has the audacity to characterize my 27 plus year tenure in law enforcement, “You see, Mr Bralley was never really a ballsy lawman type but he was intellectually stimulating and usually he was on the side of the angels.”

I take exception. Schmedlap came on the scene after my “hair on fire days,” those days when I took on gang members in the West Gate Heights neighborhood, who threatened my life, above. Through my actions, I changed state law, at least twice, and had a controversial search procedure upheld by the state supreme court, that made Schmedlap’s gang fighting days a bit easier. By the time he showed up, I was off to tamer pastures, then into the union smelter, taking on the administration, in spite of who did or did not appreciate me. I was instrumental in crafting the State’s Police Officers’ Bill of Rights, which took more than ten years in three tries before becoming law.

Schmedlap ignores the obvious, cops are all too human and some of them make mistakes while others cover up for them.

Schmedlap goes on, “I sometimes have heard of someone going native, and on occasion seen a cop or former cop begin to associate with crooks, or start doing dope, maybe even do some brutality that contrary to Mr Bralley’s beliefs is really quite rare (he in fact went back from 15 to 25 years in his history of the incidents he used to make his point, one would think if it were rampant he could come up with something from last month), but for one to truly go native in a really bad sense one would have to become a cop bashing liberal. Mr Bralley has seemingly become just such a person.”

That's the point of this site. I go back to put things in their historic perspective.

He apparently can’t understand what I wrote. Gone native and become, a “... cop bashing liberal"'? I maybe a lot of things, but Schmedlap you need to stop the cheap Mexican weed, and realize it's probably alfalfa mixed with oregano. One of those two laws I got changed was for a guy selling oregano as hashish. I successfully convicted him of fraud, before we wrote an imitation drug/counterfeit substance law.

If the sting of any of my observations smarts, so be it. My love of the law is greater than my love of the enforcers. Bad enforcers or poor enforcement that grates on the law is and always was fair game for me and all past and present good cops. If Schmedlap didn’t have that same love for the law, but instead thought that his loyalty was to the institution or his fellow officers, who also did not hold the law first, then he may never have realized that he could have been part of his missing element of a criminal enterprise to which he so strenuously objected.

With blogging, I am able to follow the stories I am interested in, or those that no other journalist or outlet is willing to pursue. Without the benefits or constraints of an assignment editor, I am able to explore topics, concepts, and techniques that traditional publications are unlikely to consider. There are no space limitations. If I wanted to publish a 20-image photo essay, I can.

I’m also able to experiment with personal projects, like my "Share the Light" photographs or my decades long "Protecting the Man" series; both are illustrated by the above shot of Gov. Bill Richardson at the 2007 State of the State speech. These ideas wouldn’t necessarily translate as well in print.

I enjoy the competitive nature of obtaining unique images in the midst of fine photographers. I am often at a slight disadvantage in equipment, but will work harder, as I did during the Sen. Ted Kennedy visit, a while back, right of the right picture, taken by James Snyder, who is on the far right of the left shot, while I worked the backside of the room, to acquire better images. Competitively, situations often times won’t present unique opportunities. However, every once in a while a moment will appear and “the Shot” avails itself.

Blogging has become an obsession, from which I derive a sense of accomplishment. I have been a journalist whether I had an assignment or not. My skills at capturing events have complimented my ability to push the work to an audience.

Addicted or not, I’m sticking with it.