gregcoit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> cokid.2986 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > When one considers that two of the politically
> > appointed commissioners are, at least up until
> > very recently, managers of the C&TS operating
> > company, that hired, employed and directed Mr.
> > Campos; and another commissioner is the former
> > mayor of Chama, I doubt that the commission
> will
> > be able to conduct an unbiased review or audit
> of
> > the C&TS business and finances during Mr.
> Campos
> > tenure. There is also the fact that the
> operating
> > company is totally owned by the commission
> itself.
> > There is too much of a conflict of interest
> here
> > for us to expect a fair, complete and honest
> audit
> > and review of the railroad’s finances and
> > business.
> > Any audit or review should be conducted by an
> > outside, independent, unbiased and non
> political
> > entity. Otherwise, there will be the inevitable
> > cries of the appearance of impropriety and not
> > being above board.
>
> Here are the facts as we know them today:
>
> There's no evidence of fraud at the C&TS
> There's no evidence that the Commission is
> incapable of looking for evidence of fraud
> The Commission budget is online along with an
> independent audit of said budget (see
> [
commission.ctsrr.com])
> cokid.2986 was an account created for the sole
> purpose of posting accusations to this thread with
> no evidence of said accusations (ie, cokid.2986
> has no prior posting history)
>
> It's easy to complain about something you nothing
> about. Being a commissioner is a thankless job,
> as is most public server jobs. Mostly because of
> people making @#$%& up out of thin air.
>
> Not only is there no fire here, there's not even a
> hint of smoke. I'm sure the commission will take
> another look at the books - let's let them do
> their job before er roast them over a fire of our
> own making.
I suggest you reread my post. I have not made or posted any accusations of fraud.
All I have done is point out potential undisputed conflicts of interest at play here and have suggested that any review or audit be conducted by an independent, outside entity. In effect, if the commission conducted the review, they would be investigating themselves and creating an appearance of impropriety. Do you have an issue with that?
