|
|
 |
 The Tucson Weekly Does Not Suffer Complaints Lightly. By The Editors
To the Editor, CorrectionTHE TUCSON WEEKLY does not suffer these complaints lightly, especially when they come from such an important, highly paid public official as Dr. Richard Carmona.However, we must confess that we noted with concern that Carmona's attorney in this matter is partners with attorney Michael Rollins, chairman of the Kino Hospital Advisory Board and a member of the self-perpetuating County Health Commission, also the subject of Mr. Franzi's article. In our opinion, such concentrations of unelected public and private power ill serve our democratic form of government. Furthermore, we must now question whether Rollins' involvement with public health issues is prompted by something beyond the admirable goal of serving, pro bono, a desperate segment of the populace.
Also, it's interesting--to us, anyway--to note that Rollins represented Carmona in his successful lawsuit against Tucson Medical Center for wrongful termination, in which Carmona received a reported $3.9 million settlement and the records were sealed. Are we now to assume that Carmona benefited from Rollins' tort work so greatly that the good doctor felt impelled to lobby on behalf of his private attorney for a position of influence within the public's medical system? If so, to what end? Does the fact that the two men have had some success in their joint effort against TMC qualify Rollins to chair the Hospital Board? Or does Rollins merely bow to Carmona's dictates in these public matters? Is there some sort of mutually beneficial teamwork going on here? Hey, are they partners in outside business ventures as well? At this point we simply don't know. But now that Rollins and Carmona's involvement in the important public business of healthcare for the needy has come to our attention, these are legitimate areas of inquiry which we at the Tucson Weekly feel obligated to pursue--bullying suit or no bullying suit. Save us some effort, Shultz & Rollins, and kindly send us a full accounting of your firm's billings, if any, of governmental and quasi-governmental agencies for the last five years. Rest assured we'll be calling you with additional questions in the near future. SADLY, CARMONA, WHO has been described in at least one press account--over which, as far as we know, he did not sue--as not a team player, is known for penning blustering NastyGrams in an attempt to bully opponents, real or imagined. Local union official Wayne Bryant, currently a 5th District congressional candidate, received one such missive not long ago. His "offense" was meeting with and counseling Pima County's Home Health workers upset about a potential $4 pay cut from their then-rate of 10 lousy bucks an hour.
Nevertheless, Carmona sent a letter to Bryant's boss, Ray Carter, threatening to sue Bryant, claiming Bryant was engaged in a "conspiracy to disseminate false information to discredit me," adding he had notified the County Attorney's Office. Bryant's attorney responded with a letter demanding Carmona retract all of his "defamatory remarks" and apologize for his "insolent behavior"--neither of which, at this writing at least, has occurred. Bryant's attorney, M. David Karnas, threatened to sue Carmona for libel and slander if Carmona didn't apologize. Needless to say, Mr. Karnas, it's a court case we'd feel obligated to cover. AS TO THE specific demand for correction of The Weekly's statement that "Carmona declared his intention to retaliate against dissidents"--sorry, but we can't oblige. If Carmona had only read the sidebar article of May 7, this brilliant physician, whom one would assume must be alert to the slightest nuance and detail, would have found the following, taken from his own memo to Bonnie Osukup, Home Health administrator: "If certain Home Health workers continue to maliciously and falsely spread rumors and call clients and the press in hopes of discrediting us and/or destabilizing our organization, I will be forced to transfer patient services to other providers in the private sector in order to protect our patients' interests." This paragraph, in our opinion, complies with any rational definition of "retaliation." In simple terms, Carmona appears to be saying, "Shut up, or lose your jobs." In his own words, Carmona sets himself up as censor, jury and executioner over employees and a program which for years have admirably served Pima County's poor, ill and elderly. Certainly we don't pretend to posses Carmona's exalted degree of higher education, but to our simple minds, at least, this appears to be nothing more than bald-faced arrogance. In our humble opinion, Carmona's words reveal a dictatorial personality who is far too enamored of the private sector to adequately perform his duties as an administrator in the public, non-military sector, where people still have rights--including the First Amendment right of free speech. FINALLY, WE DID make an error when we stated that Carmona is not a commissioned Sheriff's deputy. We're told he attended some classes at the Arizona Law Enforcement Academy on his own schedule and "in an informal manner," and that he worked "one on one" with specific instructors in some cases. In such a manner, he earned his certification from the Arizona Police Officer's Standard Training (POST). And the admiring daily press has referred to him as a "part-time homicide detective." In fact, Carmona may be the only reserve deputy with a private office at Sheriff's Department headquarters. The words "Deputy Richard Carmona, M.D., Sheriff's Surgeon" are on the door; we're told he's also sent a letter to at least one public official in which he's used the title "deputy." Frankly, in light of his demand for correction, an indication of the utmost seriousness with which he takes his titles, we're now wondering just how to refer to this protean champion of the public weal with the proper level of respect to which he apparently feels he's entitled--Dr. Deputy Carmona, perhaps? Dr. Deputy Carmona is paid $180,000 a year for his county health work, but he has already paid a considerable price for his law-enforcement service. In 1988, while dressed in SWAT equipment, and depending on who you talk to, he managed to:
And out of respect for this man who, by his own admissions as well as press accounts is a... ...son of alcoholics, former youth-gang member and one-time high-school dropout who has pulled himself up from his start in a bad Harlem neighborhood to become a Green Beret medic wounded three times in Vietnam; medical school valedictorian and commencement speaker (USCSF); life-saving trauma surgeon (board-certified, no doubt) who has delivered professional papers all over the country, and who speaks at high-school commencement exercises whenever he can; associate professor of surgery at the UA, and physician/consultant at the UA Student Health Services; consultant and faculty member at the Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences in Bethesda, Md.; physician to the Senior Olympics; chairman of the Pima County Emergency Planning Council; medical director for Rural Metro Corp.; surgeon for DPS and Southern Arizona Air Rescue; 1994 Pima County Medical Society Physician of the Year; Department of Public Safety Medal of Valor winner (for an heroic helicopter rescue mission); former SWAT Officer of the Year for the United States and Canada; as well as one whose life has been considered for the ultimate honor American culture can bestow, that of possible subject for a Hollywood movie... ...we will refrain, until a more appropriate time, from opining, in purely general terms, of course, on the appropriateness of a sworn healer storming around in the line of fire with a loaded gun--instead of, say, hanging back, if even just a wee bit, with a well-stocked medical bag--during tense situations involving armed, seemingly deranged civilians and other commissioned law-enforcement officers. As far as we know, there is no mandate that a SWAT medic must be a commissioned deputy and carry a gun, so the impetus for Carmona to do so is somewhat puzzling to us mere mortals. Suffice it to say the Tucson Weekly regrets the ego, er, error. Oh, and by the way, Dr. Deputy Carmona, again with all due respect, sir, you might want to inform your private/public lawyer cronies the Arizona Supreme Court has long since struck down as unconstitutional the statutory requirement for a demand-for-retraction letter as a means of establishing the right to damages in a successful libel case. Why waste your extremely valuable time and our much-less-valuable time? Next go-'round, please feel free to have them proceed directly to court, because--God help us--we actually enjoy the deposition process, despite its annoying oath to tell the whole truth, and all.
And, sir, to hell with that wussy sealed-records crap.
|
 |
Home | Currents | City Week | Music | Review | Books | Cinema | Back Page | Archives
|
 |
© 1995-97 Tucson Weekly . Info Booth |
|
How much is the law firm of Shultz & Rollins, Ltd., charging
Carmona for this pitifully transparent attempt at bullying critics
of his public performance? Or does the firm make up for such minor
tasks in other ways?
During the meeting some workers alleged that Home Health managers--not
Carmona--had threatened them and warned them not to complain about
the potential cut. One of the workers reportedly made a vague
joke about sexual harassment, which Bryant says he answered by
detailing, in general terms, what any worker should do if confronted
with that problem. According to Bryant and several workers present,
nobody mentioned Carmona specifically during this exchange, nor
were any of the comments apparently meant to refer to Carmona,
directly or indirectly.
