.
Charter Reviewers
Don't Understand
RE: RIO RANCHO'S CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE
The difference between
reading the charter and understanding the charter is the difference between "word calling" and "reading comprehension."
The original Charter Commission, as I recall, spent a minimum of three months simply studying state statutes, municipal charters (and) model charters from the Municipal League until there was a comprehension of municipal government.
To even suggest a mayor/commission is so far out in left field it would be laughable. There would have to be seven districts and no mayor. The commission would select a leader or chairman, not a mayor. I doubt (James) Balmer's proposal is legal, much less feasible. Does his councilor son (Howard Balmer) want to be appointed head of the city as opposed to running for mayor again? Is nepotism raising its head?
Then, there is the salary proposal once more. Why don't people understand that financial matters are done by ordinance, not a charter. But then, if your profession is in the halls of academia, there is a tendency to inflate salaries at administrative levels in all areas of education. So, why not government?
So far, and it's not very far, the review commission is batting zero primarily because of lack of comprehension.
The original commission looked at putting in standards for judicial candidates. Couldn't do it because of state statutes back in the '80s. As for runoff elections, that proposal fell through because of cost to the city. ... When you think of elections, ... remember that about 19 percent of registered voters go out and elect city officials. So, a majority of a minority select the people who run city government. A runoff election would give the same results with a majority of a minority making the choice. The additional high cost of one more election process is about the only difference.
It will be interesting to watch the progress of a review commission that has already shown a lack of familiarity with municipal government in Rio Rancho. I guess "alphabet soup" (BA, MBA, PhD, etc.) is not necessarily an advantage when it comes to changing a charter. The question is, who has agendas and how will they impact suggested changes?
John Gortz
Rio Rancho
Minutemen Don't
Belong on Border
RE: MINUTEMEN ON THE ARIZONA BORDER
I think (the Minutemen) are bunch of bigots to organize a vigilante (force) to try to control the U.S. immigrant problem.
Yes, there is a problem, and it is like the drug problem in America. If Americans quit buying the drugs and hiring the immigrants, the big problems would go away and there would be no need for these cowards. ...
It is very easy to oppress poor and unarmed people of any race, especially the hungry and sick, women and children.
Everybody wants to play God and who appointed the Minutemen? Poor people can get very desperate and dangerous. So, I say get rid of this police action before it hits the fan.
Benny Medina
Rio Rancho
State Expects Too
Much of Teachers
MY FATHER USED TO ALWAYS SAY, "You get what you pay for."
I know that is not always true. New Mexico is a prime example. Residents get way more from their educators than they pay for, and now legislators are expecting much more work for much less pay. It is so insulting. ...
The said purpose of raiding the state's contingency fund several years ago was to increase pay for the public schools and educators. I am a teacher at Albuquerque Public Schools and have been teaching for 18 years. I have a BA from Rider University and a master's from St. John's College in Santa Fe, two highly rated colleges. I have many additional college credits in my field.
Somehow, this year I am working for $50 less per month than last year, and am being threatened with another $50 a month loss next year. At the same time, I am being asked to work way beyond contractually agreed upon hours and terms. Most research, planning and grading is done on my own time without pay. This amounts to 10 or more hours of unpaid time per week. Grading essays alone may take two to three hours a night for two weeks. Meanwhile, the daily planning and executing of lessons goes on.
In addition, teachers are being burdened with counseling duties and administrative duties, disciplining, testing, test make-up, forms and conferences, and academic and career planning for students.
How many professionals are expected to do more while receiving less money? Lawyers charge for phone conversations. Doctors charge for mail responses.
Teachers are too good-natured. They always put the needs of children— other people's children!— above their own. This earns them disrespect rather than respect.
Many legislators in Santa Fe have refused e-mail from their constituents this session. What does that say about their intentions to serve and represent? Constituents trying to communicate with them on these issues are turned away.
Anyone thinking of teaching as a career should think again. And New Mexicans and legislators should think again: Your behavior now may further diminish the public school system in this state. I wonder if that is not what this governor and these legislators actually want.
Michele Grant
Rio Rancho
N.M. Badly Needs
An Anti-Gang Law
OH, WHAT A SAD DAY IN NEW MEXICO.
Once again, we have finished a legislative session without any substantive progress toward dealing with New Mexico's growing gang problem. New Mexico continues to have one of the highest percentages of gang members per capita, and gang crimes affect every county in this state.
New Mexico remains the only state in this area of the country that has no gang legislation on the books. There were high hopes this session for passage of House bills 226 and 227, sponsored by Rep. Tom Swisstack, D-Rio Rancho, which would establish penalties for gang-related crimes and penalties for recruiting others to become gang members. Gang legislation was one of the governor's priorities and the public seemed to be ready as well to see some changes.
Both bills moved quickly through House committees and both passed the House floor by Feb. 17 with unanimous approval. The bills then remained in the Senate Public Affairs Committee until being passed on March 6, and then moved to the Senate Judiciary Committee, where they remained until being passed on March 18, the day before the session ended.
Although both bills made it to the Senate Floor Calendar, there was simply not enough time for the reading and passage of the legislation.
Until this issue is taken more seriously, the residents of this state will continue to suffer the loss of innocent lives and we will leave our children unprotected from the intimidation and violence of gangs. Many thanks to Swisstack and all who attempted to get this legislation passed. The fight to establish gang legislation will continue and one day the hard work that has been put forth for the past 10 years on this issue will have the results we hope for.
Nick J. Costales
Rio Rancho
E-mail Story
Print Friendly
