{"id":2406,"date":"2007-10-19T15:52:00","date_gmt":"2007-10-19T21:52:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.nmpolitics.net\/index\/2007\/10\/complaint-filed-over-frietzephilippou-land-deals\/"},"modified":"2007-10-19T15:52:00","modified_gmt":"2007-10-19T21:52:00","slug":"complaint-filed-over-frietzephilippou-land-deals","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/2007\/10\/complaint-filed-over-frietzephilippou-land-deals\/","title":{"rendered":"Complaint filed over Frietze\/Philippou land deals"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a>A complaint filed Wednesday against Las Cruces City Councilor Jose Frietze<\/a> alleges that he violated the city ethics code by failing to disclose land transactions between his non-profit and a Las Cruces developer during council meetings at which he voted to approve that developer\u2019s projects. <\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

A non-profit Frietze founded and runs, Resources for Children & Youth, Inc.<\/a>, had been in negotiations with developer Philip Philippou for three years, and land changed hands several times beginning on Dec. 30, 2005, county records indicate. Not once during a council meeting in that time did Frietze disclose the negotiations or land transactions.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Frietze has been one of Philippou\u2019s biggest advocates on the council, promoting and voting for approval in May of the annexation and master-plan approval of a 6,000-acre East Mesa development called The Vistas at Presidio and, several months earlier, approval of the 2,600-acre Sierra Norte annexation north of Highway 70, another Philippou project.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u201cThese real estate transactions of large value appear intended to influence his vote and also create an appearance of impropriety,\u201d Las Crucen Jackye Meinecke stated in the complaint<\/a>. \u201cCouncilor Frietze not only failed to disclose these as he was required to do, he advocated for and voted for Mr. Philippou\u2019s requests for annexation before the City Council.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

In an interview, Frietze said he did nothing wrong. He said he wasn\u2019t aware until recent media reports came out that land changed hands before July of this year, when Philippou donated a 2-acre parcel valued at $180,000, and said he didn\u2019t believe he was required to disclose anything until the land actually changed hands \u2013 if at all.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

At issue are two provisions in the city\u2019s ethics code. The first states that a conflict of interest exists when an official\u2019s personal interests conflict with public duties or \u201cwhen, to a reasonable person, it would appear that the actions of a public official are partial, biased, or otherwise compromised due to the public official\u2019s private interests or personal gain being in conflict with the public interest.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

The second provision states that an official should disclose any situation that could be a conflict of interest, \u201cbe it real, potential, perceived or alleged.\u201d It\u2019s then up to the council to decide whether the official can participate in discussion or a vote on the agenda item in question.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Meinecke\u2019s complaint will be sent to an independent attorney. If he or she determines that a formal hearing is warranted, a board made up of five randomly selected members of standing city boards and committees will be assembled to consider the complaint.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Ultimately, if an ethics violation is proven, the council could take action that includes issuing a reprimand, referring the complaint to the district attorney or filing a complaint in District Court seeking Frietze\u2019s removal.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Frietze said, in the future, he will disclose the situation when the council is considering Philippou-related items and let the council decide whether he should participate. But he also defended the fact that he\u2019s never disclosed it at a council meeting.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u201cI\u2019ve never hidden it,\u201d he said of the land deal. \u201cI see it as an opportunity to talk about this project, to bring attention to it. I don\u2019t think I\u2019ve ever done anything wrong.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

The project is a living facility for people ages 16-21 who are transitioning out of foster care.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Meinecke said the merit of the project is \u201cbeside the point.\u201d And though Frietze said he didn\u2019t make any money off the land deals, she said that\u2019s also not the point. The ethics code states that the entire council is supposed to decide whether a conflict exists.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u201cThe ethics code states absolutely that councilors are to disclose their conflicts of interests, whether real, potential, perceived or alleged. In (the individual councilor\u2019s) view it may not be an issue, but they\u2019re not the ones who get to decide,\u201d she said. \u201cThe point of ethics codes is to make sure that the process is transparent to the public. With his failure to disclose these connections, he is not making these transparent.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Frietze says \u2018dirty politics\u2019 are at play<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

In a letter submitted after his interview, Frietze wrote that both organizations he runs, RC&Y, which will build the facility, and Families and Youth, Inc.<\/a>, which will run the facility, are non-profit organizations. He also said the timing of Meinecke\u2019s complaint is \u201csuspect\u201d because he\u2019s up for re-election on Nov. 6 and facing three challengers.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u201cI am disappointed that (opponents) are resorting to \u2018dirty politics\u2019 such as I have never encountered before,\u201d Frietze wrote. \u201cI believe that the voters of District 1 will see through this negative approach and will make their decision based on the issues at hand and my past performance.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Meinecke said politics have nothing to do with the complaint. She said she was present for the May Vistas at Presidio vote and wondered \u201cwhy the City Council was rushing through this annexation\u201d when there were outstanding questions<\/a> about the manner in which Philippou acquired the land from the State Land Office and other issues.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

She admitted that she is an activist in what she called the \u201cslow growth, or the controlled growth, or the responsible growth movement,\u201d but said she\u2019s never been to a meeting and is not a member of the Progressive Voter Alliance<\/a>. Though that group has no official position on candidates in the upcoming election, many of its members are part of an active movement to replace councilors they view as overly friendly with developers.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Meinecke said that\u2019s not her motive.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u201cFor other people, it probably is exactly about (the election), but for me, it is about this whole idea that he should have disclosed this,\u201d she said. \u201cAll he had to do was disclose it. We\u2019re not saying that it was wrong, or he couldn\u2019t do it.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

In addition, she pointed out that she lives in City Council District 2, not Frietze\u2019s District 1.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Land transactions raise questions<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

The land deals between Frietze and Philippou raise several questions Frietze said he could not answer. On Dec. 30, 2005, Philippou, LLC deeded two separate parcels of land – both in the Sonoma Ranch area on the East Mesa, and one of them 10 residential lots \u2013 to RC&Y. On Jan. 5, RC&Y deeded the 10-lot parcel to a separate Philippou company \u2013 Logos Development. On Jan. 6, the non-profit deeded the other Sonoma Ranch parcel to a third Philippou company, Katerina, Inc.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Meinecke alleges in her complaint that the deeding of the residential parcel violated the city\u2019s subdivision code because it had no final plat approval that is required for land transfers. If she\u2019s right, that could constitute a misdemeanor violation.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Then on Jan. 6, 2006, Philippou\u2019s Katerina gave a 1.7-acre parcel near Community of Hope on Amador Avenue<\/st1:address><\/st1:street> to Frietze\u2019s non-profit. On July 6 of this year, RC&Y deeded that land back to Philippou, and Philippou\u2019s Katerina deeded the 2-acre parcel on Amador to RC&Y. Frietze said that exchange was made because the smaller parcel wasn\u2019t suitable for the facility.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Frietze said he knew nothing about a possible misdemeanor violation related to the plat approval and didn\u2019t recall dealings related to the Sonoma<\/st1:place><\/st1:city> Ranch-area land, but said he recently spoke with Philippou\u2019s attorney, Kyle Moberly, about the matter.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u201cI remember somebody called me and asked me to go back and sign something, but I didn\u2019t really look closely at the documents, to be honest with you,\u201d Frietze said of the Dec. 30, 2005 deals.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

He said Moberly recently explained to him that some of Philippou\u2019s corporations are controlled by or actually belong to his children. The two parcels of land in the Sonoma Ranch area that Philippou gave RC&Y \u201cweren\u2019t his\u201d to give, Frietze said he learned recently from Moberly, because they \u201chad already been sold.\u201d That\u2019s why he gave them back days later, he said, but he couldn\u2019t explain why he deeded the land to different Philippou companies than the one that gave the land to him.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Frietze said he still doesn\u2019t know why Philippou gave him East Mesa<\/st1:place> land in 2005. He said he thought discussions were, from the beginning, about land on Amador.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u201cSonoma<\/st1:place><\/st1:city> ranch was just here today and gone tomorrow. So it was never even, I\u2019ve never thought about it,\u201d Frietze said. \u201cI don\u2019t know what happened with that. You\u2019ll have to ask Philip.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Philippou could not be reached for comment.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A complaint filed Wednesday against Las Cruces City Councilor Jose Frietze alleges that he violated the city ethics code by failing to disclose land transactions between his non-profit and a Las Cruces developer during council meetings at which he voted to approve that developer\u2019s projects. A non-profit Frietze founded and runs, Resources for Children & […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2406","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2406","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2406"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2406\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2406"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2406"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2406"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}