Councilman McAchran has requested that I post his following comment to this blog and therefore I would like to respond to it in our normal open forum rater then responding to a comment by means of another comment. Below I will address each of his questions or concerns to the best of my ability.
It concerns me that when I expose the lies listed on the Recall Petition, then the Recall Petition is changed to state different lies.
Our Response: At this time you still have not exposed any lies. I have spoken to Mr. Pope yesterday when we both went to the town clerk to amend the recall petition statement. The purpose for amending the statement was to open it up and make it general because we are learning more and more about you daily. We find you do a fairly good job at hiding your trails and making adjustments to make you look as if you are being picked on. With this new statement anything and everything that you do we will be able to hold you accountable for. The new recall statement is as follows;
“Councilman Brian McAchran is being recalled by the citizens of District One as a result of his past and present actions including his prior background as a police officer. We feel Councilman McAchran has repeatedly lied to the townspeople from the very first day of his campaign to present. Based on Councilman McAchran’s past it clearly shows he lacks integrity and has not demonstrated that he is capable of making rational or ethical decisions in the best interest of the town or his district.”
Now Rick Fernandez is stating that my history is the reason for the recall and has posted a letter that he supposedly received.
Our Response: The letter you are referring to is one of two letters which were received at that time, one received by me and one received by Arizona Republic. Since you and I were running against each other for the district one council seat I elected not to do anything with it because of two reasons. The first was because I did not want to run a campaign which could be construed as a mud slinging campaign and the second reason was because it was sent anonymously. I did call the AZ Republic and asked if they also had received a letter like I had and they confirmed that they did also. They also told me that due to legal concerns they would research it and release a story if it proved to be factual and that they did on May 22, 2008. I also new you would challenge my letters authenticity thus was the reason I save the original envelope.
Let's look at Rick's recent history:
1. He did not file the recall, but he did blog on and listed as facts the reasons, which were a lie.
Our Response: This is true I did not file the recall. The items on this blog only reflect what has been found to be of public record and nothing more. If we have found something in error we have corrected it.
2. He blogged and spoke before council about Jeanine Guy receiving a 5% raise, which is a lie.
Our Response: It has been confirmed that she is not entitled to this until 12 consecutive months of employment under her current position and we had place a correction to this on March 9, 2009.
3. He now has placed an anonymous letter on his blog which contains lies.
Our Response: I do not agree with you on this because it is consistent with the AZ Republic article released on May 22, 2008.
Now here's the truth:
I have spent the last fifteen years of my life under the microscope. For those who are interested there are thousands of court cases which I have been involved with, all of which are on the web in some capacity.
Our Response: I do not discredit you for this however thousands may be exaggerating a little.
There are thousands of criminals which are currently serving, or have served prison time as a result of my investigations. If at any time I had committed criminal, or unethical activities, it would be easy to see. I have walls covered with citations, medals and awards for my activities as a police officer both in Farmington and Buckeye.
Our Response: I do not discredit you for this however thousands may be exaggerating a little. As far as citations go good for you.
For fifteen years, I have honorably put on a badge and a gun to protect my community. I gave my life, or the life I had, in the defense of Buckeye.
Our Response: I am sorry about your accident.
I have never claimed to have been perfect and readily admitt I have warts and pimples like everyone else.
Our Response: Thank you for that.
During 2003, I was made a huge mistake. A mistake that almost cost me my family, but because my wife is a much better person than I could ever be, she saved our marriage. I very much love my wife and work each day to show her my love. My marriage was the only thing jepordized by my actions, and losing my marriage is much more of a loss to me than lossing any job.
Our Response: Being a married family man also…I truly understand.
This mistake that I made was an administrative policy violation for the Farmington Police Department. I was truthful about the mistake from the beginning and I was demoted back to patrol. I went back to work and continued being successful as a police officer.
Our Response: Though it was in your opinion an administrative violation, it is also a violation of poor judgment as well as poor ethical and moral values. Your past has nothing more to do with the recall as far as I know other then the Citizens question you ethical and moral values. Case in point how you involved yourself in the police Chief selection process and to this day you are seen continuously seen at the police department with Rounds and Hardesty. I can not see any reason why the three of you should spend so much time there.
This mistake included a person who was a confidential informant. This person was not an FBI Informant, not that that would have made any difference. This person had no involvement in any criminal cases. This involvement had no effect on any criminal case, or proceeding.
Our Response: We have not stated that the informant was a FBI informant nor has AZ Republic.
I testified about this incident during a criminal trial involving a former law enforcement officer, who was convicted as a result of my investigation for drug trafficking. The defendant in this case knew this informant but this informant had no involvement in the case.
Our Response: So it seems per the record.
Late 2004, I along with several persons in the Farmington Police Department became interested in serving Buckeye. I applied for the job and included all information. I was hired by the Buckeye Police Department under the direction of Sgt. Bill Seltzer and my background was accepted by AZ Police Officers Standards and Training.
Our Response: This is not a 100% true statement. The record shows that one of your former police colleagues Carl Johnston was key to you being accepted by Buckeye. Johnston, who worked with you for several years before moving to Buckeye, was on your interview panel and gave you the highest marks, this is according to Buckeye hiring documents. Johnston also conducted part of your background investigation. Johnson then became your supervisor. Maybe perhaps Saban was on board Bill Seltzer became your supervisor.
Within a couple of months of my hire, Dan Saban was hired as the Chief of Police. Wanting to ensure there were no secrets, I told Saban all of this information, to which he replied 'you did nothing wrong'.
Our Response: This is not an accurate statement. The record shows the following;
~~ McAchran stayed with the department on light duty for 2 1/2 years but was at odds with his superiors, especially Saban, who took over the department weeks after the accident.
"The records are very clear about our relationship," Saban said last week. For the first 18 months that Saban worked with McAchran, Saban allowed McAchran to voice concerns over lunch, by e-mail, by phone and in person numerous times, a Sept. 26, 2006, internal memo states.
"In my opinion," Saban wrote to him, "you have, at times, in your interactions been 'unprofessional,' 'aggressive,' 'hostile,' 'confrontational' and 'borderline insubordinate.' " But Saban did not begin documenting his interactions, he notes in the memo, until McAchran sent critical letters to local newspapers. McAchran criticized Saban for hiring more top-level managers than patrol officers and for eroding confidence in the department by making several internal audits public.
"Other than internal investigations," McAchran wrote in a letter to the West Valley View, "I have seen nothing Saban has done to make the department more 'professional' or 'trustworthy.' "
'Us against them'
According to Buckeye police documents, McAchran later resigned from a community-police-partnership program, saying he was accused of being "confrontational." He also complained of an "us against them atmosphere in the department."
McAchran's immediate boss at the time, Sgt. David Schwenn, reported a conversation in which McAchran talked about the workplace being more dangerous than "out there" in public.
McAchran described keeping a SWAT vest and shield at his desk in Farmington, according to the records, and having "a plan for if things got really bad." The next day, McAchran brought a .357 Ruger revolver in its case to work, calling it a "toy" he wanted to sell to another officer, Schwenn reported. McAchran then revealed a loaded semiautomatic pistol in a black fanny pack that Schwenn said McAchran had been carrying for at least a week. McAchran refused to store the guns in his patrol car, away from the criminal-investigations office, according to the report, and insisted on a direct order from the department's commanders.
Police Cmdr. Dan Pringle told McAchran that employees not on full duty cannot carry weapons, a memo after the incident states. McAchran agreed not to bring the weapons to work again. Schwenn is no longer with the department and could not be reached for comment.
Asked about the memo, Pringle said Tuesday, "I don't know if this would be a good career move at this point to provide any details." But he added that because McAchran complied with Pringle's request, McAchran was not disciplined. Pringle said he didn't recall any previous policy violations.
Five months later, Buckeye Human Resources responded to a "hostile work environment/discrimination" complaint by McAchran, town documents show. The date and nature of the allegations and the department's response were blacked out, and no further information was available.
Every employee of Buckeye has a one year probationary period in which the employee could be fired for any reason. I served this probationary period under the command of Saban, who I am sure would have fired me if he felt there were any problems with my being hired.
Our Response: We are surprised…
I did retire from the Buckeye Police Department during August 2007. This was not by my choice, or the will of any other employee of Buckeye, but by direction from numerous medical professionals. My retirement was the direct result from injuries recieved in my service to Buckeye.
Our Response: As stated before this is unfortunate.
The truth is I have been employed since I was fourteen-years-old. I have never been fired. I have never been asked to resign. I have never been layed off.
Our Response: The truth may never be known since your Farmington N.M. police records have been sealed.
As a note, I have received every job I have ever interveiwed for. I also had other job offers at the time I came to Buckeye.
No Response:
If Rick Fernandez did receive this letter, which I have doubts, who did it come from? Again there are thousands of criminals who do not like me and maybe it would be one of them. Rick, I would suggest you verify your source and put a name behind it.
Our Response: We can assure you this is not made up. The only people who know where this came from would be the Arizona Republic because they communicated with the individuals who sent the letter. I will try to use my resources to secure an identity but, I strongly feel the newspaper will protect their identity and based on the content I would too.
I again ask what the real reason behind these actions. Please let me know.
Our Response: Many Citizens of this town have been watching you closely. We have determined by your actions that your character is not that of what you lead everyone to believe. We find you to be lacking the honesty, ethical morals and open demeanor required to be a servant to the general public within your community. Many have seen your my way or the highway attitude or the highly volatile personality and as a result are very concerned. A few have commented about how you boast of an Inner circle that you belong to. Some have commented they feel you spend too much time at the police department. Others have noted you spending way more time then necessary with Scott Rounds. It has also been noted in a public forum that you have business relationships with other town officials or employee’s as noted in the following. We consider this to be an ethical conflict with your current position. If you ask us it sounds like a Good O Boy thing (Inner Circle).
Brucenjohnson Buckeye Police Officer Feb-27 @ 7:35 PM Report abuse Reply (AZ Republic Blog)
“We are personal friends and even business partners with BM and SR. Please understand they are our friends. We take our families on vacations together, we drink beer together and we stick together. SR recently lost his wife of 28 years. He is still in mourning. What proof does anyone have that he was with some Daisy Mountain fire fighter, traveling 95 mph in his corvette. Where did this happen? It sounds to me that someone is alleging that we at the police department are covering something up. I challenge anyone to meet with our Chief and ask him to verify if in fact this "speeding" even occurred. You will find that it never happened. There is no officer at this police department that would over look something like this. We can't speak to how other council members conduct their personal lives. If JG or JM or Terry Goddard feel an investigation is warranted. we will absolutely conduct on with absolute transparency as we always have. We are proud to serve you all. God bless President Obama. Maybe some federal money will come our way and we will be able to get back to some sense of normalcy.”
