Compliant Letter-AZ Convnetion Rq MOU-Elections
Content
New Mexico League of United Latin American Citizens
P.O. Box 1324 Las Cruces, NM 88004 (575) 312-6327
Paul “Pablo” A. Martinez Immediate Past State Director (2006-2010)
TO: FROM: DATE: RE:
National LULAC Board of Directors Paul “Pablo” A. Martinez, Immediate Past NM LULAC State Director June 9, 2013 Arizona LULAC State Convention: Abusive of Power by Individuals Acting Arbitrary and Capricious in the Discharge of Appointed Duty, Negligent in Discharging Fiduciary Duties and Responsibilities, Flagrant Failure to Use Roberts Rule’s of Order, Flagrant Failure to follow the Constitution and By-laws of the League, and Violation of Open Meetings Act by Failing to Providing Proper Notification
I attended the Arizona State Convention on June 8, 2013. I witnessed the entire convention and was in total disbelief to witness what transpired. It was somewhat a surreal experience because I could not believe the flagrant and egregious behavior and deliberate indifference displayed by a hand full of folks that were empowered to discharge the duties on behalf of the League. This was probably one of the worst incidents I have seen of overt and blatant abuse of power. The following is a chronology of events that took place: 1. Convention took place at Pima Community College-Desert Campus. I arrived at 8:45 am. Registration was taking place. The workers were new and unfamiliar with LULAC protocols and procedures. Many of them claim to be new members. There was one page, two sided flyer agenda available to the public. There was no registration cut times announced in that program. The delegates upon registration were given the official program booklet. On that program it listed Registration from 8:00 am- 10:00 am. The conference opened at 9:00 am. Congressman Raul Grijalva did speak and after the committees were appointed and workshops commenced. Registrations Committee could not provide new members and councils on any information as to where to turn in their credentials letters. 2. Several Councils arrived to participate in this convention and final registration packets and monies were submitted to registration at approximately 9:45 am. At approximately 10:45 am, several of the new Phoenix Councils were met with resistance by an individual identified as Mr. David Hernandez. He claimed to be Co-chair of the Elections, then
1
Credentials. He was not sure when asked by Past National President Hector Flores and I what his official title and what capacity that he was acting as. He claimed that registrations closed at 9:30 am and that they were too late to register. He was questioning the sincerity of the legitimacy of their councils. We explained to him a number of concerns that he and his committee would be acting in an arbitrary and capricious manner, by failing to provide proper notice. This is required in the Fair Open Meeting Act, also referred to as “Sunshine Statutes” in many states, including the state of Arizona. This meeting was not held in a private facility. It was held in public facility. Pima Community College is publically funded. The Pima College Police and Private Security were present and were summoned because of the intense conversations between the affected council presidents and David Hernandez. Mr. Flores and I accompanied the Police. Sgt. Michael Gonzales did tell all of those that his primary concern is the safety and security of the College. He did advise both parties that if there was any disturbance both parties will be held accountable and that LULAC would not be allowed to use their facilities in the future. Sgt. Gonzales did witness Mr. David Hernandez’s arbitrary abusive conduct. This type of conduct, unfortunately, triggers negative reactions and intensifies and exacerbates already volatile situations. Many of us experience members of the League are cognizant to order and the rule of law. However, like our LULAC Code states, one must learn how to discharge your duties before you learn how to assert your rights. Mr. David Hernandez did not provide any substantive reasoning or constitutional authority to deny these councils the right to register. In front of the Police Officers, President Flores and I read David Hernandez all of the constitutional authorities that guarantee the rights of council to participate. Proper Process: 1. Verify that the Council was chartered thirty (30) days before the respective convention. 2. All dues were paid by the deadline. 3. The delegates registered and listed on the credentials letter are on the Council Roster. 4. At all conventions as a past practice and courtesy, Convention Letter forms have been made available at registration. The Registration staff in many cases in the past and present will guide new councils on this process upon registration. This is merely a cosmetic issue that if both Registration and Credentials Committees act in good faith, they will assist new councils in this process prior to certification. As a past practice, this has been afforded to councils during the certification process, when the Credential Chair will announce and call credentials discrepancies. The Committee Chair will ask to see these councils and request this information prior to making a decision. This is exercising good faith and in reality a duty owed to any dues paying member or council regardless of political inclinations. 5. Credential and only Credential, not the Election Committee must make a credentials report to certify the delegation. The Chair must provided the number or registered delegates, number of councils present and state officers, including District Directors
2
being seated in their respective positions. The Chair will announce how many delegates each council is eligible to vote and how many are registered and present to vote. The Credential Chair will then advise councils with any challenges to come before the Assembly for consideration. 6. The Credential Chair and only the Credential Chair can either entertain a motion or make a motion to approve the credentials report. It must be seconded and then open for discussion. Robert’s Rule of Order applies in all cases and circumstances on parliamentary procedures. The Assembly has to final decision if the Credential Committee cannot make a determination on the facts, however, their determination must be in good faith. They must act professionally and within moral certainty that a council did not either pay their dues in the specified time or acted fraudulently. If a council submitted proof with a preponderance of evidence; e.g., post marked proof, checked predated, cashed checks, USP tracking, the Committee in good conscience should take this into consideration and their duty to help any council. All must take into account that National Office does not have the staffing to expedite the processing of new councils. The Membership Coordinator has not issued several councils their charters certificates. 7. The Assembly has the final authority once all delegates are seated. 8. All other committees may then report in the order specified in the By-laws Chapter, Article II-Conventions: Sections 4-7. No committee such as, Elections, Rules or Law and Order act or implement any process or procedures unless ratified by a seated delegation. These processes and procedures cannot deviate from the National LULAC Constitution and By-laws. 9. Elections Committee must re-open nomination to allow other candidates. A candidate may run from the floor providing that the candidate is endorsed by his/her council and must have the support of three (3) not (5) Councils in good standing. This is the delegation of each council. The past practice has been a letter from the candidate’s council and signatures of the delegation from the councils endorsing or supporting the candidate. The Elections Chair (Judge) in good faith should be fair, impartial and principled by affording ample time to assure equal treatment and fairness to all. Again, Robert’s Rule of Order must be used as the official parliamentary procedures for challenges, etc. This process should be respected and the Elections Chair (Judge) should recognize all point of order, clarifications, information, personal privilege, etc. This person should truly be a neutral party with no personal interests. He/she should maintain a professional demeanor and abide by the rule of law. This not only means the enforcing the letter, but also the spirit of the law. When people are treated with respect, fairness and dignity, at the end of the day, they will accept the final outcome. This is regardless of the desired candidate. Both President Hector Flores and I witnessed on several occasions reasonable attempts made by several council presidents of the new Arizona Councils to meet with credentials committee to submit credentials letter and maintain their eligibility to no avail. Ms. Ana Valenzuela Estrada, National Vice President for Youth acting as what was believed to be
3
a dual role of chair of host committee and credential’s chair. She avoided all questions and refused to provide any information. Throughout the entire convention, David Hernandez acted as the official spokesperson for these would be committees. He continued to display deliberate indifference and lack of sensitivity to the scores of delegates. Again, he could not provide any reasonable explanation why credentials committee would not accept registration and letter. Why was registration closed at 9:30 am, when the commencement was at 9:00 am? Why wasn’t notice properly given to all councils? Why would one agenda or itinerary handout not specify registration information, i.e., opening and closing of registrations? Yet, the printed brochure given to the delegates after they registered stated closing at 10:00 am. Mr. David Hernandez stated to all in my presence and that of past President Hector Flores that the committee made the change and can do as they wish. This was also said in the presence of several peace officers. It took over two hours to serve lunch, which caused agitation. These delegates from the new councils were treated like bastard step children and yet they took the high road and even helped serve food to assist the convention. Many did not eat. The session reconvened at approximately 2:45 pm. The State Director did not run any of the business portions. Elections Committee ran both the credential certification process. They did not use Robert’s Rules of Order. They refused to accept points of order and called everyone out of order threatening to call security. The elections chair, identified as Ms. Mari Alvarado and a woman (later identified as Ms. Bonnie Alvarez) with a Chihuahua dog in one arm and the constitution book in another was calling everyone out of order that desired clarification. They Ana Valenzuela Estrada, Ms. Mari Alvarez and Ms. Bonnie Alvarez refused to seat Miguel Zazueta’s Council and disqualified him by advising him that his council was not on a list. His council is on the website. They refused to allow him and all of the several delegates to appeal to the Assembly. They would not allow discussion or the right hear both side of any appeal or arguments that has been a past practice in numerous LULAC Conventions for the Assembly to vote to certify for those councils. There were no seated delegates because the Elections Chair, Mari Alvarado announced that she is declaring the delegation seated as opposed to using proper Robert’s Rules of Order. This process and incident was filmed by several spectators at the Convention. Ms. Alvarado went into Elections and declared all winners by acclamation. This was also a very flawed process and lack of proper parliamentary procedures. It is evident that several of the current Arizona leadership has no concept of Robert’s Rules of Order. Many of the disgruntled members claim that they will post this information to the media, youtube and facebook. It appeared that these delegates (new councils) were more in numbers than the delegation that Ms. Ana Valenzuela chose to seat. Ms. Mari Alvarado continued to run the convention. They did not follow any of the agenda items. No rules committee, no law and order, no resolutions, no audit, business reports or good and welfare of the League. The opposition did call a separate convention afterward. They elected the opposition candidates. This marked a very sad day in our League’s history. This was nothing more than bold form of dictatorship and totalitarianism at its best hiding under the cloak of “following the Constitution”. The question is what constitution? Certainly, it was not the
4
LULAC Constitution? The LULAC Constitution has a defined process and states Robert’s Rules of Order as the foundation of our parliamentary procedures. This was unequivocally not adhered to under any circumstances. I am a man of reason and one who believes in the rule of law. I am a retired and active member of law enforcement; I try to make reasonable and prudent judgments when it comes to following the rules and process. I take exception when I personally witness abuse of power or the lack of any foundation, logical and substantive reckoning to substantiate one’s arguments or interpretation on codified rules or authority. In the case of Arizona that was completely absent and a dereliction of duty with deliberate indifference by various individuals held to discharge the duties on behalf of the League. The rights of these people, including the opposition candidates were violated. It will not surprise me if these hostile acts do not result in civil litigation. Those who acted in such a manner should be held accountable for their actions and it may ultimately end up in the courts. My question to the Board is, are we to expect the same type of behaviors at the National Convention? How can we as an organization in good conscience represent the notion to our public officials’ complaints of civil rights and voter suppression when we do so against our membership without just cause? As many of you know I have a profound love for this organization and literally grew out in the League. I have witnessed both our glorious days and our dark ones. During those dark days, I was worried then like now, can our beloved League endure and survive without the loss of our credibility and honor? We are now in a serious dilemma that the public perception evident in the recent Texas LULAC Convention and now Arizona give much credence to our lack of democracy, totalitarian tactics used and abused by those placed in power, including the voting suppression of delegates. This has spewed in the public via Facebook and other public media forms, including the media. You all as National Board Members have a fiduciary responsibility regardless of political loyalties to discharge your duties fairly and equally. You took an oath to uphold the LULAC Constitution and By-laws. This is a moral and legal obligation regardless of political affiliations or inclinations. I truly believe that you all as a Board were raised on the moral principle of doing what is right as opposed to what might be popular by a few. This is all about democracy, equal treatment, fairness, transparency and respect. If this was truly extended by all of us, we would not be here today with all of the internal chaos, struggles and strife. With this concern for the safety and security of all of the National LULAC Delegation, this matter requires immediate attention and cooperation from both sides of the isle. We all have our political differences and disagreements. However, not one of us can question our mission and goal, which is what is in the best interest of our community, I sincerely hope and pray that this is the case? In this interest I propose the request of the United States Justice Department Community Relations Services to oversee and mediate this explosive and unstable situation. I concur with a recent letter prepared and sent by our NM State Director, Ralph Arellanes to the
5
United States Attorney General. This service was used in the 1990 at the National Convention in Albuquerque, NM. Their intervention prevented the serious threat of uprising and violence. The League is full of passionate and ardent civil rights advocates that are not in fear of taking a stance to protect the community when oppressed by public officials. LULAC and the leadership will not impede or prevent any potential uprising. Most of this can truly be avoided if both sides use good faith and can develop a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) from both Political Campaigns. I recommend that both parties meet immediately to mediate and agree on a prudent and reasonable process in the entire handling of the convention. That is a plan of transparency, equal representation on all committees including the elections process. Each side maintains the power to maintain order of all of their respective supporters. This election should be recorded and mediated by the US Department of Justice to prevent outbreaks of violence and pandemonium on both sides of the isle. LULAC does not belong to any one individual. No one person holds the title. In reality it is the work of the local councils that truly represents who we are, but our conduct during these last elections at the state and national levels have adversely impacted our organization and community. It is very embarrassing. None of us are above the law. We are all volunteers with a passion to serving others. If we truly agree to that notion, than why can’t we all work together and enter into an MOU. Attorneys from both sides can meet and come to a mutual understanding and signed by all parties. Beforehand, we need to find out the status of several councils that are in limbo as to eligibility? If not, why not? There is too much uncertainty and these questions need to be rectified first and foremost. I will more than likely serve as a material witness if called to testify in the case of Arizona. These folks that were in power in my honest and humble opinion acted outside the scope of authority and policy. They should be held accountable individually and not protected by the League. There should be new elections called in Arizona and these elections need to be monitored and ran by impartial members of the National Board. I will also forward this communication to both the US Justice Department and the Nevada Attorney General’s Office to demonstrate that this matter was attempted to be resolved with a solid contingency plan to avoid chaos and potential aggression at the National Convention that will inevitably adversely impact the entire organization unless we become proactive and work to resolve this process fairly and professionally. Thank you for your prompt attention and consideration in this regard.
Sincerely,
Paul “Pablo” A. Martinez Immediate Past State Director 6
(2006-2010)
Cc:
NM LULAC State Board of Directors National LULAC Board National LULAC Presidential Candidates US Department of Justice Nevada Attorney General’s Office
7
P.O. Box 1324 Las Cruces, NM 88004 (575) 312-6327
Paul “Pablo” A. Martinez Immediate Past State Director (2006-2010)
TO: FROM: DATE: RE:
National LULAC Board of Directors Paul “Pablo” A. Martinez, Immediate Past NM LULAC State Director June 9, 2013 Arizona LULAC State Convention: Abusive of Power by Individuals Acting Arbitrary and Capricious in the Discharge of Appointed Duty, Negligent in Discharging Fiduciary Duties and Responsibilities, Flagrant Failure to Use Roberts Rule’s of Order, Flagrant Failure to follow the Constitution and By-laws of the League, and Violation of Open Meetings Act by Failing to Providing Proper Notification
I attended the Arizona State Convention on June 8, 2013. I witnessed the entire convention and was in total disbelief to witness what transpired. It was somewhat a surreal experience because I could not believe the flagrant and egregious behavior and deliberate indifference displayed by a hand full of folks that were empowered to discharge the duties on behalf of the League. This was probably one of the worst incidents I have seen of overt and blatant abuse of power. The following is a chronology of events that took place: 1. Convention took place at Pima Community College-Desert Campus. I arrived at 8:45 am. Registration was taking place. The workers were new and unfamiliar with LULAC protocols and procedures. Many of them claim to be new members. There was one page, two sided flyer agenda available to the public. There was no registration cut times announced in that program. The delegates upon registration were given the official program booklet. On that program it listed Registration from 8:00 am- 10:00 am. The conference opened at 9:00 am. Congressman Raul Grijalva did speak and after the committees were appointed and workshops commenced. Registrations Committee could not provide new members and councils on any information as to where to turn in their credentials letters. 2. Several Councils arrived to participate in this convention and final registration packets and monies were submitted to registration at approximately 9:45 am. At approximately 10:45 am, several of the new Phoenix Councils were met with resistance by an individual identified as Mr. David Hernandez. He claimed to be Co-chair of the Elections, then
1
Credentials. He was not sure when asked by Past National President Hector Flores and I what his official title and what capacity that he was acting as. He claimed that registrations closed at 9:30 am and that they were too late to register. He was questioning the sincerity of the legitimacy of their councils. We explained to him a number of concerns that he and his committee would be acting in an arbitrary and capricious manner, by failing to provide proper notice. This is required in the Fair Open Meeting Act, also referred to as “Sunshine Statutes” in many states, including the state of Arizona. This meeting was not held in a private facility. It was held in public facility. Pima Community College is publically funded. The Pima College Police and Private Security were present and were summoned because of the intense conversations between the affected council presidents and David Hernandez. Mr. Flores and I accompanied the Police. Sgt. Michael Gonzales did tell all of those that his primary concern is the safety and security of the College. He did advise both parties that if there was any disturbance both parties will be held accountable and that LULAC would not be allowed to use their facilities in the future. Sgt. Gonzales did witness Mr. David Hernandez’s arbitrary abusive conduct. This type of conduct, unfortunately, triggers negative reactions and intensifies and exacerbates already volatile situations. Many of us experience members of the League are cognizant to order and the rule of law. However, like our LULAC Code states, one must learn how to discharge your duties before you learn how to assert your rights. Mr. David Hernandez did not provide any substantive reasoning or constitutional authority to deny these councils the right to register. In front of the Police Officers, President Flores and I read David Hernandez all of the constitutional authorities that guarantee the rights of council to participate. Proper Process: 1. Verify that the Council was chartered thirty (30) days before the respective convention. 2. All dues were paid by the deadline. 3. The delegates registered and listed on the credentials letter are on the Council Roster. 4. At all conventions as a past practice and courtesy, Convention Letter forms have been made available at registration. The Registration staff in many cases in the past and present will guide new councils on this process upon registration. This is merely a cosmetic issue that if both Registration and Credentials Committees act in good faith, they will assist new councils in this process prior to certification. As a past practice, this has been afforded to councils during the certification process, when the Credential Chair will announce and call credentials discrepancies. The Committee Chair will ask to see these councils and request this information prior to making a decision. This is exercising good faith and in reality a duty owed to any dues paying member or council regardless of political inclinations. 5. Credential and only Credential, not the Election Committee must make a credentials report to certify the delegation. The Chair must provided the number or registered delegates, number of councils present and state officers, including District Directors
2
being seated in their respective positions. The Chair will announce how many delegates each council is eligible to vote and how many are registered and present to vote. The Credential Chair will then advise councils with any challenges to come before the Assembly for consideration. 6. The Credential Chair and only the Credential Chair can either entertain a motion or make a motion to approve the credentials report. It must be seconded and then open for discussion. Robert’s Rule of Order applies in all cases and circumstances on parliamentary procedures. The Assembly has to final decision if the Credential Committee cannot make a determination on the facts, however, their determination must be in good faith. They must act professionally and within moral certainty that a council did not either pay their dues in the specified time or acted fraudulently. If a council submitted proof with a preponderance of evidence; e.g., post marked proof, checked predated, cashed checks, USP tracking, the Committee in good conscience should take this into consideration and their duty to help any council. All must take into account that National Office does not have the staffing to expedite the processing of new councils. The Membership Coordinator has not issued several councils their charters certificates. 7. The Assembly has the final authority once all delegates are seated. 8. All other committees may then report in the order specified in the By-laws Chapter, Article II-Conventions: Sections 4-7. No committee such as, Elections, Rules or Law and Order act or implement any process or procedures unless ratified by a seated delegation. These processes and procedures cannot deviate from the National LULAC Constitution and By-laws. 9. Elections Committee must re-open nomination to allow other candidates. A candidate may run from the floor providing that the candidate is endorsed by his/her council and must have the support of three (3) not (5) Councils in good standing. This is the delegation of each council. The past practice has been a letter from the candidate’s council and signatures of the delegation from the councils endorsing or supporting the candidate. The Elections Chair (Judge) in good faith should be fair, impartial and principled by affording ample time to assure equal treatment and fairness to all. Again, Robert’s Rule of Order must be used as the official parliamentary procedures for challenges, etc. This process should be respected and the Elections Chair (Judge) should recognize all point of order, clarifications, information, personal privilege, etc. This person should truly be a neutral party with no personal interests. He/she should maintain a professional demeanor and abide by the rule of law. This not only means the enforcing the letter, but also the spirit of the law. When people are treated with respect, fairness and dignity, at the end of the day, they will accept the final outcome. This is regardless of the desired candidate. Both President Hector Flores and I witnessed on several occasions reasonable attempts made by several council presidents of the new Arizona Councils to meet with credentials committee to submit credentials letter and maintain their eligibility to no avail. Ms. Ana Valenzuela Estrada, National Vice President for Youth acting as what was believed to be
3
a dual role of chair of host committee and credential’s chair. She avoided all questions and refused to provide any information. Throughout the entire convention, David Hernandez acted as the official spokesperson for these would be committees. He continued to display deliberate indifference and lack of sensitivity to the scores of delegates. Again, he could not provide any reasonable explanation why credentials committee would not accept registration and letter. Why was registration closed at 9:30 am, when the commencement was at 9:00 am? Why wasn’t notice properly given to all councils? Why would one agenda or itinerary handout not specify registration information, i.e., opening and closing of registrations? Yet, the printed brochure given to the delegates after they registered stated closing at 10:00 am. Mr. David Hernandez stated to all in my presence and that of past President Hector Flores that the committee made the change and can do as they wish. This was also said in the presence of several peace officers. It took over two hours to serve lunch, which caused agitation. These delegates from the new councils were treated like bastard step children and yet they took the high road and even helped serve food to assist the convention. Many did not eat. The session reconvened at approximately 2:45 pm. The State Director did not run any of the business portions. Elections Committee ran both the credential certification process. They did not use Robert’s Rules of Order. They refused to accept points of order and called everyone out of order threatening to call security. The elections chair, identified as Ms. Mari Alvarado and a woman (later identified as Ms. Bonnie Alvarez) with a Chihuahua dog in one arm and the constitution book in another was calling everyone out of order that desired clarification. They Ana Valenzuela Estrada, Ms. Mari Alvarez and Ms. Bonnie Alvarez refused to seat Miguel Zazueta’s Council and disqualified him by advising him that his council was not on a list. His council is on the website. They refused to allow him and all of the several delegates to appeal to the Assembly. They would not allow discussion or the right hear both side of any appeal or arguments that has been a past practice in numerous LULAC Conventions for the Assembly to vote to certify for those councils. There were no seated delegates because the Elections Chair, Mari Alvarado announced that she is declaring the delegation seated as opposed to using proper Robert’s Rules of Order. This process and incident was filmed by several spectators at the Convention. Ms. Alvarado went into Elections and declared all winners by acclamation. This was also a very flawed process and lack of proper parliamentary procedures. It is evident that several of the current Arizona leadership has no concept of Robert’s Rules of Order. Many of the disgruntled members claim that they will post this information to the media, youtube and facebook. It appeared that these delegates (new councils) were more in numbers than the delegation that Ms. Ana Valenzuela chose to seat. Ms. Mari Alvarado continued to run the convention. They did not follow any of the agenda items. No rules committee, no law and order, no resolutions, no audit, business reports or good and welfare of the League. The opposition did call a separate convention afterward. They elected the opposition candidates. This marked a very sad day in our League’s history. This was nothing more than bold form of dictatorship and totalitarianism at its best hiding under the cloak of “following the Constitution”. The question is what constitution? Certainly, it was not the
4
LULAC Constitution? The LULAC Constitution has a defined process and states Robert’s Rules of Order as the foundation of our parliamentary procedures. This was unequivocally not adhered to under any circumstances. I am a man of reason and one who believes in the rule of law. I am a retired and active member of law enforcement; I try to make reasonable and prudent judgments when it comes to following the rules and process. I take exception when I personally witness abuse of power or the lack of any foundation, logical and substantive reckoning to substantiate one’s arguments or interpretation on codified rules or authority. In the case of Arizona that was completely absent and a dereliction of duty with deliberate indifference by various individuals held to discharge the duties on behalf of the League. The rights of these people, including the opposition candidates were violated. It will not surprise me if these hostile acts do not result in civil litigation. Those who acted in such a manner should be held accountable for their actions and it may ultimately end up in the courts. My question to the Board is, are we to expect the same type of behaviors at the National Convention? How can we as an organization in good conscience represent the notion to our public officials’ complaints of civil rights and voter suppression when we do so against our membership without just cause? As many of you know I have a profound love for this organization and literally grew out in the League. I have witnessed both our glorious days and our dark ones. During those dark days, I was worried then like now, can our beloved League endure and survive without the loss of our credibility and honor? We are now in a serious dilemma that the public perception evident in the recent Texas LULAC Convention and now Arizona give much credence to our lack of democracy, totalitarian tactics used and abused by those placed in power, including the voting suppression of delegates. This has spewed in the public via Facebook and other public media forms, including the media. You all as National Board Members have a fiduciary responsibility regardless of political loyalties to discharge your duties fairly and equally. You took an oath to uphold the LULAC Constitution and By-laws. This is a moral and legal obligation regardless of political affiliations or inclinations. I truly believe that you all as a Board were raised on the moral principle of doing what is right as opposed to what might be popular by a few. This is all about democracy, equal treatment, fairness, transparency and respect. If this was truly extended by all of us, we would not be here today with all of the internal chaos, struggles and strife. With this concern for the safety and security of all of the National LULAC Delegation, this matter requires immediate attention and cooperation from both sides of the isle. We all have our political differences and disagreements. However, not one of us can question our mission and goal, which is what is in the best interest of our community, I sincerely hope and pray that this is the case? In this interest I propose the request of the United States Justice Department Community Relations Services to oversee and mediate this explosive and unstable situation. I concur with a recent letter prepared and sent by our NM State Director, Ralph Arellanes to the
5
United States Attorney General. This service was used in the 1990 at the National Convention in Albuquerque, NM. Their intervention prevented the serious threat of uprising and violence. The League is full of passionate and ardent civil rights advocates that are not in fear of taking a stance to protect the community when oppressed by public officials. LULAC and the leadership will not impede or prevent any potential uprising. Most of this can truly be avoided if both sides use good faith and can develop a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) from both Political Campaigns. I recommend that both parties meet immediately to mediate and agree on a prudent and reasonable process in the entire handling of the convention. That is a plan of transparency, equal representation on all committees including the elections process. Each side maintains the power to maintain order of all of their respective supporters. This election should be recorded and mediated by the US Department of Justice to prevent outbreaks of violence and pandemonium on both sides of the isle. LULAC does not belong to any one individual. No one person holds the title. In reality it is the work of the local councils that truly represents who we are, but our conduct during these last elections at the state and national levels have adversely impacted our organization and community. It is very embarrassing. None of us are above the law. We are all volunteers with a passion to serving others. If we truly agree to that notion, than why can’t we all work together and enter into an MOU. Attorneys from both sides can meet and come to a mutual understanding and signed by all parties. Beforehand, we need to find out the status of several councils that are in limbo as to eligibility? If not, why not? There is too much uncertainty and these questions need to be rectified first and foremost. I will more than likely serve as a material witness if called to testify in the case of Arizona. These folks that were in power in my honest and humble opinion acted outside the scope of authority and policy. They should be held accountable individually and not protected by the League. There should be new elections called in Arizona and these elections need to be monitored and ran by impartial members of the National Board. I will also forward this communication to both the US Justice Department and the Nevada Attorney General’s Office to demonstrate that this matter was attempted to be resolved with a solid contingency plan to avoid chaos and potential aggression at the National Convention that will inevitably adversely impact the entire organization unless we become proactive and work to resolve this process fairly and professionally. Thank you for your prompt attention and consideration in this regard.
Sincerely,
Paul “Pablo” A. Martinez Immediate Past State Director 6
(2006-2010)
Cc:
NM LULAC State Board of Directors National LULAC Board National LULAC Presidential Candidates US Department of Justice Nevada Attorney General’s Office
7
