Related Documents:
- Binh letter (PDF)
- Agenda on Ranger position (PDF)
- Minutes regarding Ranger position (PDF)
- Parker Pioneer article regarding embezzlement (PDF)

A lawyer representing the Arizona Conference of Police and Sheriffs and the La Paz County Deputies Association, has requested an investigation into La Paz County Supervisor Holly Irwin, accusing her of joining the board in creating a chief park ranger position that was filled by her husband immediately after being approved.

The letter, addressed to La Paz County Attorney Sam Vederman and written by Martin A. Binh of Binh & McDaniel of Phoenix, intimated that the supervisor is "guilty of a class 2 misdemeanor," by violating the states law concerning nepotism.

"We understand that Holly Irwin voted to create the position but then abstained from voting on the actual appointment," Binh wrote in his letter. "This abstention does not insulate her from criminal culpability. Under the nepotism statute a public official may not, '...work for, suggest or arrange such an appointment.'"

Binh claimed that La Paz County never posted the position, accepted applications, conducted testing or a search for candidates.

He noted that La Paz County already has a chief park ranger and that there was no need for a second one.

A perk of the new position, Binh said, was that Irwin would be provided a county vehicle and county gasoline to transport him the 90 miles to and from his job in Parker.

Binh suggested that the position was created as a result of an incident experienced by Larry Irwin, a La Paz County Sheriff's deputy who was unable to get immediate backup while on a fight call; something he said "every deputy in the SO has experienced."

"Unfortunately, in her effort to make the world safe for her husband and her family, Holly Irwin neglects the families of each and every law enforcement officer in the Sheriff's Office," Binh wrote. "Instead of responsibly addressing the problem of a lack of deputies on duty, Holly Irwin simply makes the problem worse. She takes her own husband out of the equation and thus makes the work place more dangerous for all the other deputies."

Binh then went on to make numerous public record requests from the county including all of Holly and Larry Irwin's e-mails from June 1, 2009 through Oct. 1, 2009.

Binh gave the county until Jan. 11 to deliver the records and the letter was forwarded to Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard.

Joe Escorza, President of the La Paz County Deputies Association, said that the Association's legal counsel advised him last week that the La Paz County Attorney conflicted out and has referred the matter to the Maricopa County Attorney's Office for investigation.

La Paz County Manager Dan Field confirmed that the county attorney had passed the letter on to the Maricopa County Attorney's Office, but said it was merely to have an outside third party look at it - and for political reasons.

Escorza said he didn't believe that either the La Paz County Sheriff's Office nor the Parks Department were aware of Larry Irwin's appointment to the position or even that a position was being created.

Field said that the position of Chief Park Ranger had been requested in the past by the current park ranger, due to continuing incidents of vandalism and theft occurring at county parks.

Escorza said that an investigation into park calls, which Larry Irwin would be responsible for, showed only 30 over the course of the last year, most in the summer months.

Second-in-command Undersheriff Rick Paterson said that the Sheriff's Office was taken by surprise by the move as there have never before been lateral transfers between the two agencies.

The county is overseen by an elected board of supervisors while the Sheriff's Office is overseen by an elected Sheriff, both who answer to voters.

Field defended the lateral transfer as being legal and said that while the sheriff was an elected official, it was the county board of supervisors that oversaw his budget and that were responsible for lawsuits and other actions taken against the Sheriff's Office.

The county also oversees personnel issues, including the filing of grievances by sheriff personnel.

"In this particular case the lateral transfer was caused by allegations of whistle blowing and current issues of criminal misconduct under investigation by the Arizona Attorney General's Office," Field said.

"I can't go into details because its an ongoing investigation but they are looking at several allegations. The office over there has committed many of the seven deadly sins."

Paterson said that the loss of Irwin, a canine officer, would hurt the department, which had invested a substantial amount of money and time in training him and the dog.

Holly Irwin said the charges of her engineering a position for her husband were false and that she had recused herself from voting for the creation of the position as well as the transference of her husband into the job.

"The state of Arizona does not recognize that union," Holly Irwin said. "Its a private union - people pay into and it is not recognized by the state whatsoever. This is coming up because we have the Sheriff's Office under investigation with the AG's office for criminal activity."

Well-placed county sources confirmed that the Attorney General's Office had been contacted by the county to investigate charges of embezzlement that involved at least three sheriff officials.

The Attorney General's Office does not confirm investigations.

Field reiterated that Larry Irwin was transferred because he was a "whistle blower" and suggested that his investigation of law enforcement brass could lead to repercussions and possible danger to him.

He said that as the county manager he had a responsibility to make sure Larry Irwin was protected and that attorney Binh had a history of Bar complaints and that his letter would more than likely generate a lawsuit from the Irwins.