Three weeks before voters in District 1 decide whether to give him another term, Las Cruces City Councilor Jose Frietze finds himself embroiled in a controversy of his own making over an alleged conflict of interest.
For almost two years, Frietze has been in negotiations with
Frietze has never disclosed the situation publicly at council meetings when Philippou items were up for votes. That includes the vote in May to approve a massive, controversial annexation and master plan for a Philippou development that could add 30,000 homes to
The situation was revealed Tuesday in an article published in the Albuquerque Journal, and is becoming public now because a water utility appealing a Planning and Zoning Commission decision related to a Philippou development wants Frietze to recuse himself.
Frietze defended his decision to not reveal the situation in the past, and said he won’t recuse himself from the vote on the utility’s appeal. He said that’s because he does not personally benefit from the land donation, the Journal reported.
“I don’t think there’s any conflict of interest,” Frietze told the newspaper. “There’s no benefit to me. … I never, ever, made a quid pro quo; I wouldn’t do that.”
Philippou declined to talk with the newspaper.
Frietze is the CEO of Families and Youth, Inc. and also founded and runs Resources for Children & Youth, Inc. RC&Y will own the land Philippou donated and lease it to FYI for a center or at-risk youth. Frietze is obviously paid a CEO-level salary, and part of his job involves getting the land and overseeing the construction of the new facility.
The Journal reported that Philippou gave RC&Y two parcels of land in December 2005. Frietze returned both, but told the Journal he doesn’t remember the details of those deals. Then in January 2006, Philippou gave a 1.7-acre parcel to the non-profit, but Frietze concluded it wasn’t suitable for the project and returned it. On July 6, Philippou gave a 2-acre parcel with a value of $180,000 to the non-profit, and that’s where the center will be built.
While Frietze and Philippou were involved in back-and-forth negotiations, Frietze has voted several times on Philippou projects in his capacity as a city councilor.
Most recently, Frietze voted in May to approve Philippou’s Vistas at Presidio development, and was visibly impatient during deliberation when residents and Councilor Ken Miyagishima questioned the benefits of the deal. At one point, in an angry outburst, he accused Miyagishima of filibustering the vote.
Avoiding the appearance of impropriety
But Frietze has been a consistent champion of growth, regardless of whether the vote in question relates to a Philippou development or a project submitted by another builder. In addition, the center he’s trying to build, a housing program for 16- to 21-year-olds who are transitioning out of foster care, is sorely needed.
All that aside, public officials have go out of their way to avoid the appearance of impropriety. That doesn’t mean Frietze shouldn’t be trying to build the center and secure land from a developer who is willing to give, and it doesn’t mean Philippou shouldn’t be willing to give. Both should be commended for their efforts.
But Frietze should have the sense to understand that the public deserves and needs to know about it.
During discussion of the Vistas at Presidio at an earlier meeting in April, Councilor Gil Jones did have the sense to disclose that his brother and Philippou are married to sisters. Jones said he would receive no personal gain from voting on the Philippou project and said he believed he could remain objective despite the familial tie. The decision on whether to recuse himself was a tough one, and Jones made a controversial decision, but it was a decision of conscience.
The city attorney later said other councilors couldn’t vote to stop Jones from voting on the project because that can only happen if a councilor has a direct or indirect financial interest.
The situation with Frietze is equally gray. He clearly has no direct financial interest in Philippou’s projects. He only has an indirect financial interest if there was a promise that he would vote for a Philippou development in exchange for the land, but there’s no evidence that happened.
So the question isn’t whether Frietze did something improper. There’s no evidence that he did. It’s a question of why a man who has been in elected office for roughly two decades, as a school-board member and councilor, still doesn’t understand that it’s important to keep the public informed of anything that might create even the remotest appearance that something is improper. His actions and attitude are certain to further jade a skeptical public. He would be wise, in the future, to follow the example set by Jones.
Will it hurt Frietze in the upcoming Nov. 6 election? He’s facing three challengers, but growth isn’t as hot an issue in his inner-city district as it is on the