Building deal involves shades of gray
Alamogordo Daily News
Daily News Editorial
Posted: 06/27/2010 12:00:00 AM MDT


Despite what some people may believe, appearances really do matter, especially when it involves politics and personal business.
While checking into claims of impropriety concerning the Otero County Commission's purchase of the old Firestone building on White Sands Boulevard, one question kept begging to be asked: Why didn't commission chairman Doug Moore speak out sooner?

Instead, there was the appearance of secrecy about the whole deal until Janet White, who is running as an independent candidate for Moore's seat that he will vacate in November because of term limits, brought forth allegations of wrongdoing and behind-the-scenes shenanigans.

Those allegations involve Moore, whose company, Lane Plumbing, performed work on the building that was purchased by the same commission over which he presides. The county approved, during a special meeting June 3, the purchase of the almost 12,000-square-foot building for about $1.44 million. It will house the assessor, treasurer and county clerk offices.

Moore and commissioner Clarissa McGinn voted to approve the purchase, while commissioner Ronny Rardin was absent because of a prior commitment.

Moore claims that, legally, he did nothing wrong since there is no clear-cut law forbidding elected county officials or employees from personally benefiting from the actions and votes of their employer's in this case, the Otero County Commission.

The Otero County policy regarding procurement of tangible personal property, services and construction defines an employee of the county as any person receiving a salary, wage, per diem and mileage from the county.

According to a copy of the policy we obtained, it can include elected officials even non-compensated individuals who perform personal services as an elected or appointed official, or performing personal services in some other capacity for the county.

The ethical conduct section of the employee participation policy states no employee of the county can participate directly or indirectly in procurement when the employee knows that he or she or any member of that person's immediate family has a financial interest in the business seeking or obtaining a contract.

But, in the eyes of the law, nothing illegal occurred. Because of that, Moore did nothing wrong.

Moore told us his private business is a private matter. What he fails to acknowledge is that "private" does not apply to a public official in situations such as this. There is this thing called perception to which the public clings. That is why Moore is hearing, as he told us recently, "veiled comments and innuendo" within the community that he has done something illegal or inappropriate.

And it doesn't help that Moore, who was running for the District 5 seat on the Public Regulation Commission, was taken off the ballot prior to the June primary elections because a judge ruled he didn't have enough valid signatures to qualify for a spot on the ballot.

The complaint against Moore, a Republican, filed in Valencia County alleges some of Moore's nominating signatures were not from Republicans, some were from people who do not live in District 5 and others were illegible. Some of the signatures for Moore did not have sufficient information to confirm they were valid; two more were from people who signed Moore's petition twice; and one signed Moore's and Jamie Estrada's another PRC District 5 candidate from Las Cruces petitions.

We're not accusing Moore of wrongdoing, but both cases show his failure to dot the i's and cross the t's.

In the absence of crystal-clear laws regulating what is and isn't a conflict of interest, public officials should always avoid the appearance of impropriety because it's a matter of trust between the elected official and the voter.

Moore also told us that if he had a direct contract with the county, "then I would abstain. That would be the ethical and moral thing to do. I am not going to vote to give myself something."

His company's plumbing work in the "new" county building deal may be legal, but its appearance is anything but ethical or moral. Moore should have erred on the side of caution. Elected officials should always abstain from votes where there may be a conflict of interest, no matter what the law states.

Because to Moore's employer, the taxpayers of Otero County, appearances do matter.

http://www.alamogordonews.com/alamogordo-opinion/ci_15387065