If you're coming here via the microsite attacking Adan Ballesteros, make sure you learn the facts about Michael Cargill as well. — Eds.
Recent investigations have raised questions about Ballesteros' vulnerability for the General Election. These questions led Donna Beth McCormick to make a motion to rescind Ballesteros' endorsement at the North by Northwest meeting last night. While this motion failed (in an 11-14 vote), it is important to note that some voted against it because a 15-day notice was suspended, which made some members uneasy.
-The DEA made a call to the DPS in January of 1995 to say that they were investigating activities that occurred in 1991 involving Ballesteros, and wanted the DPS's assistance.
-DPS began investigating, and interviewed Ballesteros in May of 1995. After a year and a half of joint investigation by DPS and DEA, a formal complaint was filed against Ballesteros for five counts of allowing confidential informants to import cocaine without interdiction, accepting cash gifts from a confidential informant, and failing to make accurate and truthful reports to his supervisors regarding his activities.-In May of 1995, Ballesteros was placed on administrative leave (with pay) pending the results of the full investigation.
-When the investigation concluded, most of the allegations against Ballesteros were sustained, and in October of 1997, the director of DPS decided that Ballesteros was to be terminated. His status was changed to “suspended without pay.”
-Ballesteros appealed the termination recommendation, and in August of 1998, a full evidentiary hearing was held before the Public Safety Commission. On September 10, 1998, they determinded that Ballesteros was fired for cause. (Bob Vann requested this information via Public Information Act on 01/07/08. See page 7 http://www.co.travis.tx.us/cou…
-Ballesteros sued claiming EEOC violations, and lost. He appealed to the 5th Circuit, and lost again.
So first of all, who is Bob Vann? Bob Vann is the current Constable in Precinct 2, a Republican. Is there any doubt that he will use this information to bury Adan Ballesteros in the General Election?
So what does this all mean? Adan Ballesteros was investigated in a lengthy joint investigation. This investigation resulted in his termination, a termination which was upheld by two attempted appeals.
During last night's meeting, Ballesteros was given a rebuttal. He claimed that the 5th Circuit is pro-employer, not pro-employee. He claims that for 2.5 years he was not allowed to present evidence, and he could not find an attorney willing to take his case. He also cited a Workforce Commmission report (98-027341-1-0498) which gave him the clearance to file an EEOC complaint against DPS.
Finally, he cited that he was allowed independent judgment, and that he stopped a lot of drugs. He also maintains that this was a case of retaliation because he wouldn't fire his secretary (see the attached docs). To my knowledge, he did not mention the cases in which he was accused of letting drugs in.
Ballesteros is a man of apparent questionable character. He was fired by the incumbent because of his history. He did not fully disclose his legal past. How can a man who was fired for illegal activities have any hope of challenging the Republican incumbent in November?
I will close with this. Ballesteros came to the North by Northwest meeting in his scout leader uniform. I am an Eagle Scout, and the Scout Oath is:
On my honor I will do my best
To do my duty to God and my Country
and to obey the Scout Law;
To help other people at all times;
To keep myself physically strong,
mentally awake, and morally straight.
What kind of teacher fails to live up to the oaths he is teaching his students? Do we want this kind of leader as our law enforcement officer?
The Scout Law:
A scout is