The Las Cruces Sun-News reported:

Of the changes made in the Arizona law, Miyagishima specifically pointed to a provision that clarified that any municipal, county or state law enforcement officer in Arizona who makes a lawful stop and has reasonable suspicion can have a person detained until a records check can be conducted to verify their identity and residence.

Another change that Miyagishima praised was a change in the law that said that race cannot be used as a reason for asking someone for their immigration papers except for what is already allowed by state and federal law.

Tuscon news station KGUN has an explainer of the differences between the “fix” bill and the original legislation.

Las Cruces Mayor Ken Miyagishima (Photo by Heath Haussamen)

The Las Cruces City Council considers a sheriff’s department investigation involving City Manager Terrence Moore to be a “personal issue” at this point, Mayor Ken Miyagishima says.

“The council’s position is that it’s a personal matter, and they would just like to let the matter continue,” Miyagishima said this afternoon. “Once we get written confirmation that the inquiry is complete, we’ll figure out if there’s anything we need to do.”

Miyagishima’s comments come after the council spent three hours behind closed doors earlier today discussing Moore’s employment. Miyagishima said much of the meeting was focused on Moore’s contract, and said the council is planning to add some “performance objectives” that the city manager must meet.

The council will discuss adding such measureable goals to Moore’s contract during a closed session in April and will probably meet in May to publicly vote on those changes to the contract, Miyagishima said.

The news comes as the Doña Ana County Sheriff’s Department is investigating two incidents involving Moore and his ex-wife. The sheriff’s department took over what was originally a Las Cruces Police Department probe after the district attorney raised concerns about LCPD investigating a case involving its own boss and urged the transfer.

Terrence Moore

Moore oversees the police chief and, by extension, the police department.

Last year, Las Cruces police looked into injuries Moore’s then-wife suffered in late 2008 and questions surrounding a police report the city manager filed over a prescription-drug incident in January 2009, treating the two incidents as a single case. Las Cruces police closed the case last year without filing charges.

Interim Police Chief Pete Bradley has said the case was dropped because no one, including Moore’s ex-wife, alleged a crime, and police didn’t have probable cause to proceed. Moore has pointed out that no one has alleged “that I’ve done anything wrong.”

The district attorney has said Moore should have been interviewed, and the sheriff’s department says it intends to attempt to speak with the city manager.

Other issues

But the sheriff’s probe isn’t the only reason the council met today. In January, the council met in closed session to discuss Moore’s contract after the city manager came under scrutiny for two issues that had been raised publicly:

• Moore had recently reimbursed the city for some costs associated with two business trips he took last year – after a complaint was filed over one trip and an attorney requested documentation about the other.

• Moore had his administrative assistant babysit his children on Dec. 21 – while she was on the clock and being paid with public money – so he could attend a city council meeting.

Following that January closed session, the council announced that it would “revisit certain terms” of Moore’s contract and “offer further clarification where needed,” according to a news release sent out after the meeting.

Moore did not immediately respond this afternoon to an e-mail  seeking comment.

The mayor said he hopes the investigation is complete before the city council discusses issues involving Moore behind closed doors on Monday.

“I would like to see what the sheriff’s department comes up with. And I would like to have it before we go to closed session on Monday,” Miyagishima said.

The mayor said he had no other comment, except that he thinks it was the “appropriate move” to give the investigation to “any agency other than LCPD.”

Miyagishima may not get his wish on the timing of the investigation’s completion. Doña Ana County Sheriff Todd Garrison has told us that his agency’s intent “is to get it dealt with as quickly as possible.”

But Garrison said Sunday his understanding was that Moore’s ex-wife was not available for at least a week. Garrison also said the department’s ability to focus on the case this week would depend on whether other crimes were committed that consumed a great deal of investigative resources.

As the Independent reported Monday, the sheriff’s department took over the LCPD probe after the district attorney raised concerns about LCPD investigating a case involving its own boss and urged the transfer.

Moore oversees the police chief and, by extension, the police department.

Last year, Las Cruces police looked into injuries Moore’s then-wife suffered in late 2008 and questions surrounding a police report the city manager filed over a prescription-drug incident in January 2009, treating the two incidents as a single case. Las Cruces police closed the case last year without filing charges.

Interim Police Chief Pete Bradley has said the case was dropped because no one, including Moore’s ex-wife, alleged a crime, and police didn’t have probable cause to proceed. Moore has pointed out that no one has alleged “that I’ve done anything wrong.”

Martinez has said Moore should have been interviewed, and the sheriff’s department says it intends to attempt to speak with the city manager.

That’s according to a news release sent out by the city moments after the Council’s closed session on issues surrounding Moore’s employment ended this evening.

“As a result of the meeting, it was agreed by all to, at a later time, revisit certain terms of Mr. Moore’s employment agreement with the City of Las Cruces, and offer further clarification where needed. Mr. Moore has agreed to this and will accept council direction as determined at the later meeting,” Mayor Ken Miyagishima said in the release.

No other information about the personnel issue was made available. Moore had no immediate comment except to refer to the news release and direct questions to Miyagishima.

Moore has been under scrutiny lately for at least two issues that have been raised publicly. He recently reimbursed the city for some costs associated with two business trips he took last year — after a complaint was filed over one trip and an attorney requested documentation about the other.

And Moore had his administrative assistant babysit his children on Dec. 21 – while she was on the clock and being paid with public money – so he could attend a city council meeting.

Today’s meeting came after Councilor Dolores Connor pushed fellow councilors to schedule a private session to discuss the issues.

The meeting comes after Councilor Dolores Connor pushed fellow councilors to schedule a private session.

Moore has been under scrutiny lately for at least two issues that have been raised publicly. He recently reimbursed the city for some costs associated with two business trips he took last year — after a complaint was filed over one trip and an attorney requested documentation about the other.

And Moore had his administrative assistant babysit his children on Dec. 21 – while she was on the clock and being paid with public money – so he could attend a city council meeting.

Connor first asked for the closed session in November – before the babysitting incident – but Mayor Ken Miyagishima rejected her request, and the majority of councilors backed him up in refusing to schedule such a meeting.

Miyagishima suggested at the time that Connor meet with Moore individually.

“I don’t think that this rises to the need for any type of a closed meeting,” he said.

At last week’s meeting, Connor raised the issue again, during council comment at the end of the meeting. At that point, the mayor and two other councilors were no longer present.

“I am disappointed that I’ve been ignored on this subject, and I don’t think it’s something we can continue to ignore,” Connor said at last week’s meeting.

Mayor Pro Tem Sharon Thomas agreed, saying she was “also concerned.” The other councilors present, Miguel Silva and Olga Pedroza, also agreed.

Moore is scheduled to have a regular evaluation in February, but Connor said that’s not soon enough for the concerns she wants to discuss, and the other councilors present last week agreed.

Today’s meeting is at 4 p.m. in the council conference room at city hall.

Las Cruces City Manager Terrence Moore (Photo by Heath Haussamen)

Las Cruces City Manager Terrence Moore had his administrative assistant babysit his children on Dec. 21 – while she was on the clock and being paid with public money – so he could attend a city council meeting.

Mayor Ken Miyagishima says that wasn’t appropriate, and in an interview Moore apologized for the distraction his children caused for several hours in a conference room high-level city staffers usually use to watch council meetings.

“For some people that was regarded as a distraction, and all I can offer… is if having Parker and Grant with me at city hall during the afternoon of the 21st was a disruption or an inconvenience, I apologize,” Moore said in an interview.

Moore hasn’t reimbursed the city for the cost of the almost 5.5 hours his assistant, Barbi Nevarez, spent babysitting his two young boys. By contrast, Moore did reimburse the city for some of the costs associated with two business trips he took last year after questions were raised about whether they were appropriate expenditures of public money.

Asked about the babysitting, Phil Sisneros, spokesman for Attorney General Gary King, said King’s office “would be concerned with the use of public funds for non-public use,” but he said a local-government case like this might be more appropriately directed first to the district attorney. Doña Ana County District Attorney Susana Martinez could not be reached for comment.

The city council meeting began at 1 p.m. on Dec. 21. Nevarez’s time sheet reveals that she stayed at work until 6:20 p.m., well past the time her normal workday ends at 5 p.m. She left work early two days later to make up for the time.

A Dec. 21 e-mail exchange between Moore and Nevarez leaves no doubt about the reason Nevarez worked late:

“It doesn’t look like the meeting is going to end by 5 p.m. There is an Aggie game tonight. Do you want me to take the boys? I’m not sure how much the tickets are though,” Nevarez wrote Moore at 4:44 p.m.

“What time is the Aggie Game? If you have to run home, I could meet you there ASAP (Mayor is now trying to end the meeting by 5:30 pm). Sooooo sorry!” Moore replied at 4:47 p.m.

“No problem – just checking – as long as I can get out of here by 6:30 I’ll be okay,” Nevarez replied at 4:49 p.m.

Complaints filed

Over the next two weeks, two anonymous complaints were filed with the city through its fraud, waste and abuse hotline. Although those complaints and the report issued by the committee are exempt from release under the state’s Inspection of Public Records Act, Moore voluntarily released them, as he did recently with another complaint related to the trip he took to Chicago in November.

The city’s Hotline Review Committee wrote in its report on the incident that staffers were “uncomfortable with the children present as they were disruptive.” Staffers also “felt it was not appropriate for staff to babysit during work hours,” the report states.

And, according to the report, some staffers were concerned about a “risk of important documents being defaced” after Moore’s youngest son pulled an official document from his father’s desk for a game he was going to play with a staff member who was trying to “entertain” him.

Miyagishima said in an interview that Moore won’t have Nevarez babysit his children while she’s on the clock in the future because it’s not an appropriate use of city money.

“I suggested in the future that he not do that. He needs to either take that time off and leave… or make other arrangements,” Miyagishima said. “And that’s what he’s agreed to do.”

Moore calls incident ‘a purely innocent thing’

Moore told the hotline committee that the mayor approved in advance him bringing his children with him to the council meeting. Moore and the boys’ mother are divorced, and the boys were in his care that week.

The city manager said in an interview that he had already received approval from Miyagishima to take off that entire week, but he decided he needed to be at work on Dec. 21 to attend a ceremony for retiring Police Chief Harry Romero and Fire Chief Adolf Zubia and for city council deliberations on an important mid-year budget adjustment.

“It was a really informal arrangement in which that portion of that one day I decided I should be there for those two events,” Moore said. “… I just brought [the children] along with me – a purely innocent thing.”

Miyagishima said it’s not uncommon to see Moore’s children at city hall, particularly on weekends. And while Moore told him he would be bringing his children with him to work on Dec. 21, Miyagishima said Moore didn’t tell him in advance that he was going to have Nevarez watch them.

Miyagishima said Moore wasn’t required to be at work on Dec. 21. The mayor said he told Moore in the middle of the council meeting that he could leave, but Moore insisted on staying.

Las Cruces City Manager Terrence Moore (Photo by Heath Haussamen)

Las Cruces City Manager Terrence Moore reimbursed the city for some costs associated with two business trips he took last year — after a complaint was filed over one trip and an attorney requested documentation about the other.

Moore says the timing of the city Hotline Review Committee’s investigation into a November trip to Chicago and a records request from a Las Cruces attorney about a September trip to Santa Fe are coincidental and had nothing to do with the decisions to reimburse the city for some of the costs of both trips.

Although the Hotline Review Committee’s work relates to personnel matters and is exempt from release under the New Mexico Inspection of Public Records Act, Moore gave the city clerk permission to release the committee’s report and related records in response to a records request from the New Mexico Independent.

“I have nothing to hide,” Moore said about releasing the documents.

The hotline committee – which is composed of three top city administrators appointed to the board by Moore – made clear its opinion that Moore’s trip to Chicago was inconsistent with the city managers’ direction to city staff to be frugal about travel. The committee also found that Moore hadn’t provided some required documentation related to the trip.

Moore flew to Chicago – his hometown – on Nov. 18. The trip was approved by Mayor Ken Miyagishima, who has to sign off on all of Moore’s business travel. On the evening of Nov. 19, Moore spoke at the University of Illinois, discussing his 2008 participation in the Joint Civilian Orientation Conference – a program sponsored by the secretary of defense that, according to its Web site, is designed for “public opinion leaders interested in growing their knowledge of the military and national defense issues.”

On the same day, Moore spoke to a university class about his experiences as a city manager. He didn’t notify the city of any scheduled business other than those two events, though he didn’t fly home until three days later – on Sunday, Nov. 22.

Anonymous caller sparks review

On Dec. 4, an anonymous caller complained to the city’s fraud, waste and abuse hotline. That sparked the review in which the hotline committee identified three problems:

• The city requires documentation of the purpose of a business trip, which Moore did not provide.

• Moore combined a vacation with a business trip – which city policy allows – but he did not schedule annual leave for any of the time he was gone and didn’t provide a breakdown of city and personal expenses, which was required.

• Moore didn’t provide the required justification for the rental car he used while in Chicago.

The hotline committee’s report includes strong statements about the trip:

“The City paid $751.57 for Mr. Moore to present his experience with the Joint Civilian Orientation Conference he attended in September 2008, from 4 to 6pm on November 19 in his hometown,” the report states, adding that, because of budget constraints and Moore’s direction to city staff to eliminate all travel except that necessary for required continuing education of professional, certified staff, “this is clearly an inconsistency.”

“It is vital to the tone of the organization that Mr. Moore strictly adhere to policy and make fiscally responsible decisions consistent with expectations and direction to all City staff,” states the memo from the committee, which is made up of the assistant city manager, city attorney and the city’s internal audit manager.

The same day the committee issued those findings in its report to Miyagishima, the mayor met with Moore. Following that meeting, Moore reimbursed the city for $483.87 – all the costs of the trip except the $267.70 for airfare – and two annual leave days (for Nov. 18 and 20) were deducted from his account.

Moore, Miyagishima not sure reimbursement was necessary

Las Cruces Mayor Ken Miyagishima (Photo by Heath Haussamen)

But Moore and Miyagishima both say now they’re not sure that was a fair resolution. A section in Moore’s employment contract, they say, appears to allow travel for funding for events like those Moore attended in Chicago.

They’re referring to part of section eight of the contract, which states that the city “shall budget and pay for” official travel, meetings, “and occasions to adequately continue the professional development” of Moore, and for “short courses, institutes, and seminars that are necessary for the Employee’s professional development and for the good of the Employer.”

“Basically he’s allowed to just do a lot of things and the city should just reimburse him,” Miyagishima said in an interview.

“That was one of those bills in which, based on my contract, I have those abilities,” Moore said in an interview. “The bottom line, I’ve taken care of all of this… I think that was an admirable thing to do. Is it necessarily fair? No.”

Moore also said he didn’t request vacation time because he considered the day he was speaking to be a work day, in addition to the two days he traveled – on a Wednesday and a Sunday. Because one travel day was on the weekend, Moore said, he thought he could take Friday off without using leave time.

A Dec. 28 memo from Miyagishima to Councilor Dolores Connor tells the final piece of the story: Miyagishima wrote that, in retrospect, “the City of Las Cruces may have overstepped its boundaries by asking Mr. Moore for reimbursement.”

“In discussing this with Mr. Moore, he prefers to leave things as is and just move forward,” the memo states. “I, too, feel this is the best option.”

The Santa Fe trip

In the case of the trip to Santa Fe, on Aug. 25 Moore’s assistant reserved a room at the Eldorado Hotel for the nights of Sept. 25 and 26 – at a base cost of $299 per night. Moore signed a travel request form on Aug. 27, and Miyagishima approved it.

That travel request states that the trip was for “Misc. meetings (Lawrence Horan-CLC Lobbyist) (Joe Thompson-Animal Protection Voters) (NM City Management Assn.).”

Moore stayed both nights at the Eldorado Hotel. On Sept. 29 his assistant, Barbi Nevarez, sent a required memo to the city’s disbursements supervisor with Moore’s hotel receipt for both nights attached.

Days later, on Oct. 5, Las Cruces attorney Joseph Holmes filed a records request for a number of documents, including “travel and expense reports for Mr. Moore and his guests” for the trip to Santa Fe. Holmes has not returned a call seeking information about why he filed the request, but city records indicate he was provided with the documents.

Then, on Oct. 8, Nevarez filed a revised memo with the disbursements supervisor that included a new statement:

“Not knowing what time the meetings would end on September 26, 2009, the hotel had an open reservation. The meetings finished at 4 p.m. He decided to stay overnight instead of driving home at night. He will reimburse the city for the extra night.”

Moore said in the interview that he always planned to stay in Santa Fe two nights, but he didn’t know whether he or the city would pay for the second night. The formal meetings involving the New Mexico City Management Association took place Friday, he said, and Saturday was a day of related “informal” meetings.

He said the later decision to reimburse the city for the second night – after initially submitting the receipt for the cost of both nights to the city – was “just part of the reimbursement process.”

“When we get back we submit everything to finance… We would then go over… OK, when was the work finished?” Moore said.

Moore said he realized during that review that, because meetings he had scheduled for later on Saturday were cancelled, his work was done in time that the city should not have paid for the hotel on the night of Sept. 26. That, he claimed, led to the revised memo on Oct. 8.

“Ethically, I was not at liberty to charge the city that second night, and that’s why I took care of it,” Moore said.

Mayor: Moore ‘never showed any irresponsible spending’

Miyagishima, who signs off on all of the city manager’s travel in advance, said he wasn’t too familiar with the details of the Santa Fe trip, but did know that Moore had reimbursed the city for one night.

Miyagishima said in his experience traveling on city business with Moore, the city manager has “never showed any irresponsible spending,” so he’s trusted that when Moore presents him with a travel request it’s legit.

“Maybe I should, but I don’t scrutinize it a lot,” the mayor said.

Miyagishima said he has become more intentional about asking Moore to not nickel-and-dime the city on travel reimbursements recently.

As to why the reservation was made at the Eldorado – one of the most expensive hotels in Santa Fe – Moore said it was “the only spot available at the time” because there was a wine festival in Santa Fe.

“I picked a bad weekend perhaps in that regard, but nevertheless my efforts were successful,” Moore said, specifically mentioning a newspaper article that ran in November about Moore’s reaching out to Animal Protection Voters during that September trip for help in improving the city/county animal shelter.

The issue will be discussed at the council’s Sept. 14 work session, Miyagishima wrote today in an e-mail to constituents.

Miyagishima wrote that he does not support a complete ban on cell-phone use while driving but believes hands-free sets should be required. He said the meeting comes “in response to public concerns as well as recent reports about the dangers of ‘Texting while Driving.’”

Albuquerque, Santa Fe and Española already require those who talk on cell phones while driving to use hands-free sets. And earlier this year, the Legislature considered a statewide ban on texting while driving. The bill, sponsored by state Rep. Antonio Lujan, D-Las Cruces, passed the House but died in the Senate.

The drainage issue was one of many problems with the controversial developer’s subdivision that journalist Vicki Nisbett revealed in an article published on this reporter’s blog in October 2007. And, despite the statement made at the time to Nisbett by Kirk Clifton, development administrator for Philippou’s company, the drainage improvements have still not been completed.

Apparently, the City of Las Cruces has had enough. The Las Cruces Sun-News is reporting that the city has filed a lawsuit alleging that Philippou has failed to comply with building requirements in several of his subdivisions and is asking a district court judge to force Philippou to complete the work he started.

The City of Las Cruces states in its 15-page complaint that Philippou has “failed to construct drainage infrastructure improvements” in the Dos Sueños subdivision and that the city, its citizens and others “will suffer irreparable injury unless injunctions are granted.”

The complaint also seeks to force Philippou to comply with infrastructure requirements he agreed to but has not met in several other Las Cruces subdivisions. In addition to drainage improvements, the issues identified include roadway and utility work and rock wall improvements.

What happened to finishing the work in 2007?

In 2007, Nisbett quoted Clifton as saying most of the outstanding work in Dos Sueños, which is located north of U.S. Highway 70 on both sides of Jornada Road, should be completed in four to six weeks. That included construction of a 20- to 40-foot-wide concrete drainage ditch the city required on the north side of the subdivision.

“There’s been continuous work out there, although it might be slow,” Clifton said. “We just want to get done and out of there as quickly as everyone wants us to.”

Kyle Moberly, a Las Cruces attorney who represents Philippou, had something much different to say to the Sun-News on Monday when asked about the lawsuit.

“Apparently, the city wants to publicly embarrass Mr. Philippou, who in his ongoing efforts to resolve these matters in this difficult economic climate, earlier this morning submitted proposals to the city for resolving these matters,” the newspaper quoted Moberly as saying. “Since we only received a copy of this complaint late this morning, we have not had a chance to thoroughly review it and, therefore, are not in a position to properly respond. However, our cursory review reveals the complaint appears to be overly broad and inconsistent with previous communications we received from the city.”

Las Cruces Mayor Ken Miyagishima had this to say to the newspaper:

This lawsuit is really about the public trust. The city has the best interest of the public to consider… We have a responsibility to ensure that residents get what they’re promised when they move into a city-approved subdivision.

A history of controversy

The lawsuit is the latest trouble for Philippou, a man who is arguably one of the most controversial developers in the state. Here are some of the other headline-grabbing situations in which he’s been involved in recent years:

• Last month, he paid the City of Las Cruces more than $200,000 for an outstanding water bill only after the city placed liens on his properties.

• In 2007, it was revealed that then-District 1 City Councilor José Frietze had failed to disclose land donations Philippou made to a non-profit Frietze runs.

• Philippou’s most visible controversy relates to his dealings with the State Land Office. Pat Lyons, the state land commissioner, bypassed his own bidding process and agreed to lease thousands of acres of public land in Las Cruces to Philippou in 2006. Around the same time, Lyons received approximately $30,000 in campaign contributions from Philippou and a political committee and lobbyists tied to the developer.

It’s a land deal Attorney General Gary King has said is flawed. The AG’s formal opinion states that the lease agreement’s method of compensating Philippou’s company for developing the land is “not comprehended by and in conflict with” a statute that allows developers who improve land for the state to be compensated only for the appraised value of the improvements.

The controversies surrounding the land office and Frietze helped fuel public outcry over the city’s growth policies and, in large part, led to the overthrowing of the city council in two elections held in late 2007 and early 2008.

The speech begins at 12:15 p.m. in the council chambers at City Hall, 200 N. Church St., and is open to the public.It will also be televised live on Comcast cable Channel 20 and webcast online at clctv.com.

Miyagishima, according to The Las Cruces Sun-News, plans to focus on the city’s sustainability and budget.

“We had to tap into reserves to meet our budget this year,” the newspaper quoted Miyagishima as saying. “We need to have a sustainable budget. We need to look at potential revenue sources such as alternative energy and the ability for our community to grow.”