Transportation commissioners tied to tainted projects

The number of suspicious circumstances surrounding two Department of Transportation

building projects keeps growing.

The Albuquerque Journal reported this weekend on another tie between one of the defendants in the Bernalillo County Metro Court scandal and the DOT projects – this one involving two governor appointees to the state Transportation Commission.

Apparently, two commissioners – Johnny Cope of Hobbs and Jim Franken of Las Vegas – had the department call in a consultant to work on the redevelopment of its statewide headquarters in Santa Fe and another project, the redevelopment of a district office also located in Santa Fe.

That consultant was Michael Murphy, one of five defendants in the Metro Court case.

Murphy acted as a right-hand man for former Court Administrator Toby Martinez, prosecutors allege. Read the indictment by clicking here. Prosecutors say the group bilked taxpayers out of a combined $4.2 million by inflating and falsifying invoices on the project. Three have pleaded guilty for their roles and five others, including Martinez and former Senate President Manny Aragon, are facing felony charges including conspiracy, mail fraud and money laundering.

Prosecutors alleged in indicting Murphy several weeks ago that defendants tried to extend their scheme to a DOT project, but didn’t specify which project. Transportation Secretary Rhonda Faught says it was the district office in Santa Fe.

Regardless, defendants in the metro court case had ties to both DOT projects. That and other circumstances have tainted the projects. Here’s what we know:

• Martinez was, for a time in 2005, project manager for the redevelopment of the DOT headquarters.

• Martinez and a subcontractor who is under indictment in the metro court case, Raul Parra, flew, at the state’s expense, with Faught to Dallas in 2005 for a meeting on the project. That was done even though, according to the state, Parra was not officially involved in the project.

• Murphy, at the suggestion of Cope and Franken, was given confidential bid documents in the spring of 2006 even though he never signed a contract to do work for DOT. When DOT learned later of Murphy’s alleged role in the metro court scandal, it asked for the documents back, but Murphy refused to return them.

Murphy, the Journal reported, is a contributor to Gov. Bill Richardson, having given $8,500 to his re-election campaign last year.

He’s not the only contributor whose ties to a DOT project have raised eyebrows. The bidder originally selected for the headquarters project was Gerald Peters, a longtime financial supporter of the governor who donated to and held a fundraiser for the governor’s presidential campaign while the negotiations were ongoing. Were Richardson running in a state race, such contributions would be illegal.

Peters has not been directly tied to the metro court defendants. You can read Peters’ comments about the project by clicking here.

Situation needs investigation, not damage control

The newest revelations mean Richardson is now tied to the scandalous projects both through donors and appointees. It’s possible, if the situation worsens, that Faught will take the fall. She made some pretty strong comments to the Journal this weekend admitting that DOT screwed up in giving Murphy the documents before he signed a contract.

“This was premature… It was improper,” the Journal quoted her as saying.

She was also asked about the fact that Murphy later submitted a $2.2 million bid to oversee the headquarters redevelopment project – a contractor has not yet been selected – and said this:

“No way in hell would I hire him. Why would I hire someone who refused to give us proposals back?”

Richardson has also done some damage control, ordering two reviews of the DOT headquarters project to ensure there was no wrongdoing and ordering that the contract be re-bid, a move Peters supported. The other project was cancelled.

But here’s the reality: Richardson appointees and contributors have their fingerprints all over two DOT projects dogged by controversy in part because of the ties to men indicted in a separate case for allegedly stealing millions of dollars from taxpayers. This situation epitomizes the term “appearance of impropriety.”

But that’s not proof of actual impropriety. Fair or not, there is a cloud hanging over the heads of Peters, Cope, Franken and the governor. Because of the involvement of people close to Richardson, the reviews ordered by the governor won’t be enough to allay concerns. We can only hope the U.S. attorney’s office gives this situation a thorough look as it continues its probe of the metro court scandal.