Commentary: The “investigation” of Sheriff Enrique Vigil was a sad joke, rivaled for silliness only by Vigil's lawsuit against two county commissioners.
Sparked by some now-departed county employee, the investigation accused Vigil of saying bad things about the County's HR Department and “contributing to a toxic environment for county employees.”
Hilariously, the investigator “found some support for the allegation of a perception of a toxic environment, but could not limit the cause to the sheriff.” Unambiguous decisions by several juries have confirmed the existence of that “toxic environment,” as have sources for several of my columns. That atmosphere was toxic before Vigil's election, and many employees would point to HR as a major reason.
Vigil was charged with speaking “badly about the human resources department without providing a factual basis.” Well, he spoke plenty bad to me about HR around the same time, but provided factual support. I'm just not seeing the factual basis for the investigation, unless the ex-employee's complaint required the County to conduct it. Waste of money.
But Vigil's responsive lawsuit strikes me as nonsense. It tries to allege that the “investigation” not only was improper but could intimidate Vigil from speaking out.
“Could intimidate?” Most lawsuits allege actual damage. Your car hit mine, or ran over my donkey and killed it. Not, “I'm suing you because you drove too fast and could have hit my cat.”
But if Vigil claimed flat-out that he'd been intimidated, jurors would laugh. A sheriff in Pat Garrett country alleging he was intimidated by some investigator asking him if he said any bad words? Vigil has spoken out long and loud to everyone who'd listen, and didn't stop when someone started “investigating” him. His lawyer, Gene Chavez, told me Vigil was speaking in his constituents' interest and that “attempts to intimidate him from that will have the opposite affect.” So the lawsuit can't allege they've shut him up.
A little research showed that the Workman's Comp Board suspended Chavez in 2012 for a long list of violations including “false statements to a tribunal” and “failing to communicate with clients.” When he appealed, the NM Supreme Court affirmed. (Chavez said the experience taught him a lot and made him a better, more careful lawyer.)
An earlier Chavez case arose from a late-night incident at a McDonald's. A 19-year-old girl was in her car in the drive-thru lane. A McDonald's customer, not entirely sober, found the girl attractive and made this known to her, then continued pressing his attentions on her after she signified her lack of interest. Her car allegedly dragged him a little ways.
Chavez filed suit for the rejected would-be lover against McDonald's for not having had a security guard on duty to prevent such incidents. The jury quickly decided against the Plaintiff.
Is his current case more promising?
Vigil has Chavez answering local reporters' questions. Yo, Kiki: we elected you, not an Albuquerque lawyer.
Vigil's lawsuit could prove costly for us taxpayers. Even if it's thrown out at an early stage, some lawyer gets well-paid to file the papers to make that happen.
Further, it contributes to a stupid and unproductive polarization – also costly.
It also distracts us from some real issues: are DASO deputies underpaid? What can and should we do about that? Is HR as bad as almost everyone claims? Did HR folks indeed get a string of consultant-blessed raises that deputies and road department crews didn't see? Was that justifiable? As regards DASO, is HR being unnecessarily uncooperative or providing a useful check against imprudent hires?
These serious issues should be examined fairly and openly – not litigated.
Peter Goodman is a local writer, photographer, and sometime lawyer. He initially moved to Las Cruces in 1969, holds two degrees from NMSU, and moved back here in 2011 with his wonderful wife. This is his most recent Sunday column in the Las Cruces Sun-News. His blog Views from Soledad Canyon contains further information on this subject, as well as other comments and photographs, and past newspaper columns.