Multi-agency probe deals death blow to 'billion dollar' drug ring
Suspects allegedly smuggled more than 330 tons of illegal narcotics a year
through Arizona
PHOENIX - Federal, state and local authorities announced the results Monday of
"Operation Pipeline Express," a 17-month multi-agency investigation responsible for
dismantling a massive narcotics trafficking organization suspected of smuggling more
than $33 million dollars' worth of drugs a month through Arizona's western desert.
At a news conference Monday, top-level representatives for the agencies overseeing the
investigation, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Homeland
Security Investigations (HSI), the Pinal County Sheriff's Office, and the Arizona
Attorney General's Office, laid out details of the case.
"Today we have dealt a significant blow to a Mexican criminal enterprise that has been
responsible for poisoning our communities with the distribution of millions of dollars'
worth of marijuana, cocaine and heroin," said Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne. "I
find it completely unacceptable that Arizona neighborhoods are treated as a trading floor
for narcotics. This case is the result of an outstanding partnership between federal and
county law enforcement authorities and the Arizona Attorney General's office, which will
handle the prosecution. These partnerships are essential to making sure these criminals
experience the full force of the justice system."
Officials say the ring, organized around cells based in the Arizona communities of
Chandler, Stanfield and Maricopa, used backpackers and vehicles to move loads of
marijuana and other drugs from the Arizona-Mexico border to a network of "stash"
houses in the Phoenix area. After arriving in Phoenix, the contraband, which also
included cocaine and heroin, was sold to distributors from multiple states nationwide.
Monday's announcement comes just four days after federal and local investigators
executed the third in a succession of large-scale enforcement actions tied to the probe,
taking another 22 defendants into custody. To date, 76 individuals have been criminally
arrested in connection with "Operation Pipeline Express," ranging from organizational
"bosses" to stash house guards and load drivers.
During last week's warranted searches, authorities seized more than two tons of
marijuana, 19 weapons - including assault rifles, handguns, and shotguns - and nearly
$200,000 in cash.
"Through our joint efforts, we've sent a resounding message to the Mexican cartels that
Arizona is off limits to their operatives," said Matthew Allen, special agent in charge for
HSI in Arizona. "As this case makes clear, law enforcement in Arizona is united in its
resolve to protect our communities and our country from the scourge of large-scale
narcotics trafficking. We stand ready to use every tool and resource at our disposal to
attack and dismantle these organizations."
Prior to last week's takedown, authorities had conducted two other major enforcement
actions in connection with "Operation Pipeline Express." Earlier this month, agents
executed a dozen search warrants throughout central and southern Arizona, including in
the communities of Casa Grande and Stanfield, taking custody of 17 primary case targets.
In mid-September, the initial enforcement action in the investigation resulted in the arrest
of six suspects on state drug and conspiracy charges.
"We in Arizona continue to stand and fight the Mexican drug cartels, who think they own
the place," said Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu. "This is America and we shall bring a
crushing hand of enforcement against those who threaten our families and our national
security. While this is a historic drug bust, sadly this represents only a fraction of what
my deputies face every day."
Intelligence gathered as part of "Operation Pipeline Express" indicates the organization is
tied to Mexico's Sinaloan cartel and has been in existence for at least the last five years.
During that timeframe, authorities conservatively estimate the ring has smuggled more
than 3.3 million pounds of marijuana, 20,000 pounds of cocaine and 10,000 pounds of
heroin into to the United States, generating almost $2 billion in illicit proceeds.
Authorities believe the organization has produced such huge profits by gaining a virtual
monopoly over the smuggling routes along an 80-mile section of Arizona's international
border, from Yuma to just east of the community of Sells.
The probe that evolved into "Operation Pipeline Express" began in May 2010 following a
traffic stop by Pinal County Sheriff's deputies in Stanfield. To date, the case has resulted
in the seizure of more than 60,000 pounds of marijuana; in excess of 200 pounds of
cocaine; approximately 160 pounds of heroin; more than $750,000 in cash; and nearly
110 weapons, including multiple assault rifles.
In addition to the three lead agencies, more than 20 federal, state and local law
enforcement organizations provided support for this investigation. They include: U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP), both Border Patrol and CBP Air and Marine; the
Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA); the U.S. Attorney's Office; the U.S. Marshals
Service; the Arizona Department of Public Safety; the sheriff's offices in Pima and
Maricopa counties; and the police departments of Ak-Chin, Casa Grande, Chandler,
Coolidge, El Mirage, Eloy, Florence, Gila River, Glendale, Goodyear, Marana, Maricopa,
Phoenix, and Young Town.
At Monday's news conference, officials stressed the drug-trafficking investigation is
ongoing and U.S.-based authorities are continuing to coordinate closely with their
Mexican law enforcement counterparts, as well as with the HSI and DEA Attache offices
in Mexico, to pursue additional leads and suspects. Much of the cost associated with the
investigation is being funded by two federal anti-drug initiatives, the High Intensity Drug
Trafficking Area (HIDTA) program and the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task
Forces (OCDETF). Additionally, HSI's Arizona-based Border Enforcement Security
Task Force (BEST) played a central role in the case.
Attorney General Bondi’s Office of Statewide Prosecution’s Case
Results in 60-Year Sentence for Gang Member
TALLAHASSEE, Fla.–Attorney General Pam Bondi today announced that Eric Santiago,
a Manatee County gang member, was sentenced to sixty years in prison after being found
guilty during a retrial on criminal charges of racketeering and conspiracy to commit
racketeering. Santiago, 25, was a member of the East Side Crips, a violent gang that has
terrorized Manatee County through house and car burglaries, assaults, drug sales,
violence against law enforcement and other crimes.
―Manatee County is now a safer place with this gang member behind bars,‖ stated
Attorney General Pam Bondi. ―We will continue to prosecute these cases and prevent
gang activity in our state.‖
In 2009, the Second District Court of Appeals reversed one of the predicate incidents in
Santiago’s first trial and remanded for resentencing. Because the appellate reversed one
of the predicate incidents used in the trial, the appellate court in turn reversed the
convictions. Upon a retrial this week, Santiago was sentenced to 30 years in prison for
conspiracy to commit racketeering and 30 years in prison for racketeering, both sentences
to run consecutively. Santiago was prosecuted by the Attorney General’s Office of
Statewide Prosecution in partnership with the State Attorney's Office of the 12th Judicial
Circuit.. Santiago was sentenced by the Honorable Judge Harry Rapkin of the 12th
Judicial Circuit.
UTAH HOSTS FIRST-EVER MOUNTAIN WEST IMMIGRATION
SUMMIT
Utah is breaking new ground on the contentious debate over immigration reform.
Attorney General Mark Shurtleff is hosting the first-ever Mountain West Immigration
Summit today in Salt Lake, bringing together business, law enforcement, faith and
government leaders from the mountain west region to discuss immigration policy in the
United States.
"This is the first meeting of its kind anywhere," says Shurtleff. "Leaders from states in
the mountain west region have come together for the first time to discuss sensitive
immigration issues. At a time when the immigration debate is tearing people apart we
have brought people together to move the conversation forward rationally."
The summit keynote speakers include Uvalda, Georgia Mayor Paul Bridges whose
economy has been severely impacted by recent enforcement only immigration policies,
and syndicated columnist Ruben Navarratte, whose insights on immigration circulate
throughout the region and across the country helping to form opinion and shape the
debate. Participants will spend the one-day summit focusing on three main elements:
1. Economy: What role do immigrants and immigration play in the current regional
economy, and how are they important to the future of the region's economy across a
number of sectors?
2. Security: How does the region's sense of public safety hinge on the relationship
between immigrants and law enforcement?
3. Faith: How have congregations of faith grown from and been shaped by the influx of
immigrants to the region? In what ways have the problems in the immigration system
affected religious communities?
"Bringing groups together to discuss real rational solutions to this complex issue has
yielded incredible results," says Shurtleff. "The success of the Utah Compact has put the
spotlight on Utah and now we have an opportunity to affect the national immigration
debate in a really positive way."
The Utah Compact was drafted by concerned Utah partners over several months and
signed last November. It focuses on changing the tone of the often heated and contentious
immigration debate here in Utah. It urges community leaders and the public to sign-on
and commit to using its guiding principles as they address challenges associated with a
flawed national immigration system. It expresses the community's desire for rational
discussion on the sensitive immigration debate. The Mountain West Summit is the first
step in taking the Utah Compact's principles to a broader audience.
NORTH DAKOTA SUES MINNESOTA OVER ITS ENERGY
POLICY
BISMARCK – Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem announced this morning that North
Dakota has filed a lawsuit against Minnesota over its Next Generation Energy Act of
2007 (NGEA), which imposes restrictions on carbon dioxide emissions from the
generation of electricity imported from outside of Minnesota and consumed in
Minnesota.
―Minnesota’s Next Generation Energy Act has direct and serious consequences for
North Dakota,‖ said Attorney General Stenehjem.
North Dakota has become a vital and essential source of electricity for consumers in
Minnesota. Power stations in Minnesota generate approximately sixty percent of their
electricity from coal, all of which is imported. North Dakota’s power plants export the
vast majority of the electricity they produce to consumers in other states, including
Minnesota. In this way, North Dakota and Minnesota have collaborated to develop a
mutually beneficial energy and economic partnership.
The NGEA purportedly relates to ―global warming‖ and ―Greenhouse Gas Emissions.‖ It
imposes restrictions on carbon dioxide emissions from out of state energy sources as a
purely symbolic gesture that could only have negligible impact toward actually achieving
the purpose of reducing greenhouse gases on a global scale.
In its lawsuit, North Dakota alleges that the NGEA violates the Commerce Clause of the
United States Constitution, unconstitutionally interfering with North Dakota’s energy
production. The NGEA imposes prohibitions on energy imported from North Dakota
while providing four exemptions from the prohibitions. All of these exemptions favor
Minnesota projects or businesses. The complaint alleges that the NGEA favors new
large energy projects in Minnesota or Minnesota-based businesses with new large
energy projects to the detriment of North Dakota and other out-of-state interests and
entities.
―It is unfortunate it has come to this. As Minnesota seeks to rebuild its economy, it will
need energy. Much of that energy will need to come from sources outside Minnesota.
Over the last four years, we in North Dakota have made every effort to convince
Minnesota officials to rescind this Act,‖ said Stenehjem. ―Earlier this year, the Minnesota
Legislature, in a bipartisan move, voted to repeal the law, but the Governor of Minnesota
vetoed the legislation. But for the veto of the law by their Governor, we would not have
had to take this step.‖
State Files Lawsuit to Defend Permitting Process
October 28, 2011
Anchorage, Alaska – The State of Alaska filed a constitutional challenge today in
Anchorage Superior Court against an ordinance recently enacted by ballot initiative in the
Lake and Peninsula Borough.
The local ordinance attempts to give the Lake and Peninsula Borough’s planning
commission authority to nullify state permitting processes and prevent the development
of certain large-scale resource development activity. The ordinance requires the planning
commission’s approval of a borough development permit before an applicant may receive
a state or federal permit.
The State’s lawsuit alleges that the borough ordinance is invalid because it tilts the
constitutional balance between state and local interests. The Alaska Constitution gives the
Alaska Legislature the authority to determine how to develop resources for maximum use
consistent with the public interest. It is therefore the State’s duty to evaluate projects to
determine whether they can be conducted in a way that serves the public interest, and if
so, what safeguards to require. Under the Lake and Peninsula Borough ordinance, the
State may never have that opportunity. While boroughs have limited power to regulate
some of the activities associated with resource development, a small majority of voters in
a local community cannot usurp the more comprehensive state authority and eliminate the
entire state permitting process.
"This case is not about state support for or against a Pebble Mine project," Alaska
Attorney General John Burns said. "It is about upholding the State’s constitutional
authority and responsibility to evaluate whether, on balance, development of Alaska’s
resources is beneficial to all Alaskans. This administration has consistently maintained
that the State will not sacrifice one resource for another. In the case of Pebble, we haven’t
yet even considered the pros and cons of any development that may be proposed. But the
Alaska Constitution requires the State—not the borough—to fairly and completely
conduct this evaluation."
Attorney General Welcomes 9th Circuit Decision Upholding the Logjam
Timber Project
October 28, 2011
Juneau, Alaska – Attorney General John Burns today welcomed the news that the Court
of Appeals for the 9th Circuit affirmed Judge Timothy Burgess’s U.S. District Court
decision upholding the "Logjam" timber project.
The State intervened in this lawsuit brought by Tongass Conservation Society,
Greenpeace, and Cascadia Wildlands, seeking to stop U.S. Forest Service ("Forest
Service") timber sales associated with the "Logjam" project. The project authorized the
logging of 3,422 acres of forest, and the construction of five miles of permanent roads
and 17 miles of temporary roads in the Tongass National Forest on Prince of Wales
Island in Southeast Alaska.
In its decision today, the 9th Circuit found that the U.S. District Court properly granted
summary judgment to the Forest Service. The 9th Circuit, summarily rejecting the
plaintiffs’ arguments, held that the plaintiffs failed to show that the Final Environmental
Impact Statement under the National Environmental Policy Act was flawed, or that the
Forest Service failed to take the requisite "hard look" at the environmental consequences
of the Logjam Project.
At stake was the future of the Viking Lumber Co., a family-owned small business that
has been one of the largest year-round employers on state were at risk. Without the
"Logjam" timber sales that were given final approval under this ruling, Viking Lumber
Co., the only mid-sized mill operating in Southeast, would not have had enough timber to
continue operations and the economies of several Alaskan communities would have been
negatively impacted.
For further information, contact Assistant Attorney General Vanessa Lamantia, (907)
465-3600.
Attorney General Pruitt Sends Letter to Nation’s AGs over Concerns on
New Faulty Data for Natural Gas Wells
EPA data called ―lousy‖ by researchers; used to create new regulations
OKLAHOMA CITY – Attorney General Scott Pruitt this week sent a letter to the
nation’s attorneys general alerting them to new inaccurate methods being used by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to formulate regulations on natural gas
exploration.
The EPA’s new method was used to measure the amount of methane gas released into the
atmosphere by conventional natural gas wells as well as from unconventional wells used
for hydraulic fracturing.
The EPA used Natural Gas STAR data to calculate emissions; however STAR data does
not measure methane escaping from wells into the atmosphere. Rather, STAR data
measures methane returned to the surface through drilling or flowback. Most of this
methane is recaptured by companies to sell or is burned through approved flaring, if not
marketable.
―This misstep or deception by the EPA has resulted in new figures that are faulty,
unreasonable and based on a distorted understanding of how gas drilling operates,‖ Pruitt
said.
Pruitt sent a letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, requesting additional information
on the methodology employed by the EPA, and suggesting that the EPA’s methods be
revisited and revised.
In a letter sent Wednesday to attorneys general, Pruitt shared the data flaws and concerns
over the federal agency’s creation of regulations based on the inaccurate data, asking
them to review this issue in their own states.
―The agency’s actions have a very real effect on families, businesses, communities and
state economies,‖ Pruitt said. ―The EPA’s actions in this case are working toward eroding
the states’ ability to self-regulate and stifle exploration of domestic energy sources,
putting our national energy security at risk without justification.‖
GREEMENT RESOLVES ACTION AGAINST VETERANS CHARITY AND
TELEMARKETER
The organization agrees to follow procedures to make sure donations are spent for
charitable purposes and the telemarketer has agreed to stop soliciting Oregonians
The Oregon Department of Justice today announced an agreement that resolves
accusations of misconduct against an Oregon-based veterans charity and its for-profit
telemarketer.
"It is extremely important that charities be properly managed, that they do not deceive
donors and that the telemarketers they hire follow the law," said Attorney General John
Kroger.
The agreement announced today stems from a 2010 lawsuit against Veterans of Oregon
& Members of the Community (VOMC) and the organization's telemarketer, Associated
Community Services, Inc. (ACS). The allegations included violating Oregon's no-call law
and misleading donors about how their contributions would be spent.
VOMC Director John Neuman cannot serve as director of the organization for two years.
The VOMC board agrees to new procedures that will insure that donations are spent for
actual charitable purposes. Before contracting with a telemarketer, the board must obtain
proposals from at least three different firms. VOMC has agreed to restrict any
telemarketer from using the organization's donor information for commercial purposes. In
addition, the full board will review all scripts and written materials provided to donors
and will not approve solicitations that fail to describe the primary purposes for which
donations will be used or that are otherwise not accurate. The organization will adopt an
annual budget and closely monitor travel requests and expenses.
ACS in May resolved allegations of misconduct by paying $40,000 and agreeing to
refrain from soliciting donations in Oregon on behalf of any nonprofit client until
December 31, 2013. After that time, ACS is prohibited from fundraising for any charity
unless it files documents with the Attorney General demonstrating that it will comply
with applicable law. ACS is also prohibited from making false or misleading statements
about how donations will be used and must clearly disclose its status as a professional
fundraiser.
Among other things, DOJ's lawsuit alleged that ACS and VOMC told donors that
contributions would be used to help homeless veterans or veterans with medical needs. In
fact, after VOMC paid ACS 80% of the donations received, VOMC used much of the
small fraction of remaining funds not on homeless veterans, but to pay the expenses of
VOMC's directors and others as they travelled the state awarding medals.
In addition to misrepresenting how charitable donations would be used, the lawsuit
alleged that ACS violated state law governing telephone solicitations. Oregon statutes
prohibit charities and their fundraisers from calling phone numbers listed on the federal
Do Not Call Registry, with limited exceptions. However, the Department's complaint
alleged that ACS called numbers on the federal registry as well as Oregonians who
expressed a desire not to be called.
The Attorney General is responsible for supervising and regulating the activities of
charitable organizations in Oregon. Today's announcement is part of an ongoing effort by
the Department of Justice to crack down on questionable charities and fundraisers that
exploit public sympathy for veterans, children and law enforcement personnel.
Assistant Attorney General Heather Weigler and Senior Assistant Attorney General
Elizabeth Grant handled the case for the Oregon Department of Justice Charitable
Activities Section.
Attorney General John Kroger leads the Oregon Department of Justice. The Department's
mission is to fight crime and fraud, protect the environment, improve child welfare,
promote a positive business climate, and defend the rights of all Oregonians.
Stanford Report, October 31, 2011
California Attorney General Kamala Harris gives public talk at
Stanford Law School
When the state's chief law enforcement officer gave a public talk at Stanford Law School
last week, many of the students who surrounded her were not just any law students, but
her law students. 'There seem to be two positions for DAs and AGs to take: tough on
crime and soft on crime. I believe there's a third way forward: smart on crime,' California
Attorney General Kamala Harris told the audience gathered to hear about her efforts to
address the state's revolving-door prison system.
BY SHARON DRISCOLL
Kamala Harris seemed an unlikely winner in last year's closely contested race for
California Attorney General, despite her years of experience as a prosecutor in Alameda
County and as San Francisco's District Attorney. Introducing Harris before a public talk
at Stanford Law School last Thursday, law Professor Joan Petersilia recounted her
dismay when watching coverage of the race.
"The headlines were unusual, with things like 'Kamala Harris coming out for
rehabilitation,' and 'Kamala Harris worried about mass incarceration and the impact on
minority communities,' so not the tough on crime rhetoric we've come to expect," said
Petersilia. "I thought, 'She's going to change her tune when she sees how tough this race
is.'" But Harris didn't take the bait – and she won.
"There seem to be two positions for DAs and AGs to take: tough on crime and soft on
crime. I believe there's a third way forward: smart on crime," Harris told the audience
gathered to hear about her work as chief law enforcement officer for the state and her
efforts to address the state's revolving-door prison system – a system so dysfunctional
that the U.S. Supreme Court ordered the prison population be drastically reduced by
2013.
"We need to learn from the public health model and focus on prevention," Harris said.
Harris achieved a number of "firsts" when she was sworn in as attorney general of
California in January of this year – the state's first African American woman and the
nation's first Indian American to hold the job. She may also be the first attorney general
to not only seek the scholarly wisdom of academics but go one step further by
collaborating to establish a course to study key challenges facing the state.
"One of the first calls I made when I took office was to Joan," said Harris, who with a
shrinking budget for staff and resources was looking to data to inform her priorities and
policy. She explained that in California today 70 percent of former prisoners will
reoffend within three years. Rattling off examples of costs such as $10,000 to prosecute a
criminal, $35,000 a year to put one in a county jail and $50,000 a year to send one to a
state prison, she said it made sense to find ways to prevent first-time offenders from
entering the state prison system and to focus on support to help keep previous offenders
from reoffending.
The idea for a class came about when Harris made that call to Petersilia, inviting her to
study the state's recidivism problem. Petersilia had to beg off, citing her teaching
commitments, but suggested that the project be made into a seminar. Harris agreed. When
AB 109 passed, the class narrowed in focus and also took on greater urgency: The new
legislation, signed into law by California Gov. Jerry Brown last spring and enacted this
month, shifts responsibility for certain lower-level offenders from the state to county
authority in what is called "realignment." But it does not include funding for
comprehensive research into how each of California's 58 counties will address the
dramatic shift in responsibility. The class, Advanced Seminar on Criminal Law & Public
Policy: A Research Practicum, which began in September, will fill some of that gap by
studying one county's efforts to implement the legislation, providing what Petersilia and
Harris hope will be a model for best practices.
"Her commitment to science and scholarship is so unique for an elected official. In my 30
years of studying this area I don't think I've ever met anyone who is so true to the truth
and the data," said Petersilia, who has immersed herself in issues related to prison
recidivism and realignment for the best part of 25 years. An empiricist who was the
director of the Criminal Justice Program at the RAND Corporation, her expertise is
politically neutral and highly sought. She has served as a special adviser to former Gov.
Arnold Schwarzenegger, helping to reorganize adult corrections and working with the
California State Legislature to implement prison and parole reform (she was standing
next to him at the signing ceremony for AB 900, which authorized nearly $8 billion for
prison construction and rehabilitation initiatives). She chaired Schwarzenegger's
Rehabilitation Strike Team and also was co-chair of California's expert panel on offender
rehabilitation programs. Brown also quickly sought her advice after taking office.
Many of the law students in the audience at last week's discussion, who gathered around
Harris before and after the talk in a way they might crowd a rock star, are not just any
students – they are also her students, enrolled in the seminar. They listened intently as
Harris shared family tidbits about growing up in Berkeley; her parents, both graduate
students, active in the civil rights movement; she and her sister, Maya, now a Stanford
Law School alumna, tagging along to meetings and marches. But it was the meat of the
talk, the nuts and bolts about how California will enact AB 109, dramatic legislation that
shifts nonviolent prisoners from state to county jails (and so reduces state prison
population per the U.S. Supreme Court's mandate), that really engaged them.
One student, whose seminar project involves speaking to county prosecutors, asked how
the state would address prosecutors who tried to circumvent AB 109 by pushing for
stiffer jail terms, and so forcing nonviolent criminals AB 109 aims to locate in local jails
for shorter periods of time into the overcrowded state prisons.
"We will have financial incentives and disincentives that we expect will prevent that kind
of prosecution," said Harris, adding that this is a good example of how the seminar will
help bring to light challenges early in the process so they can be dealt with.
It was a give and take, with Harris answering questions but also offering advice, when
another student described Project ReMade, an initiative she is launching to educate
former prisoners about entrepreneurial enterprises so that they can start their own
businesses.
"Many of them will be parents. I hope you offer parenting skills as part of that effort too,"
said Harris, who praised the project.
Harris offered hope that by keeping nonviolent offenders in their own communities, close
to family and services that should be better able to prevent them from returning to prison,
AB 109 might help to break the cycle of recidivism. She also acknowledged the
challenges everyone in the state will face in making it work.
"I cannot do this without the collaboration of one of the best institutions and students in
the country," she said. "With your research, Stanford Law School is providing leadership
for the state." She also added a caveat: "You are providing leadership for the state, and
for the country. Everyone will be watching."
Sharon Driscoll is editor of Stanford Lawyer magazine.
CSG-WEST Announces New Executive Director
Edgar E. Ruiz has been selected as the new Executive Director of The Council of State
Governments-WEST(CSG-WEST), a regional public, nonprofit and nonpartisan
legislative organiza tion serving the 13 western states. He will assume his duties on
November 2, 2011.
"Mr. Ruiz has been deeply involved in the initiatives, issues and programs of CSG-
WEST during the 10 years he has been an employee of the organization, rising to the
position of Deputy Director," said Representative Marcus R. Oshiro, Hawaii, Chair of
CSG-WEST, who announced the appointment.
"We are indeed fortunate to have a candidate with the experience, insight and bilingual
skills that Edgar brings to this position," continued Rep. Oshiro, who chaired the Search
and Selection Committee. "His background on the legislative staff of a California
Assemblymember, as well as his experience in working at the state and local levels of
government and as a key member of our CSG-WEST team, give him the breadth of
service that impressed the members of the selection committee."
Mr. Ruiz holds a Bachelor's degree and a Master of Public Administration from San
Diego State University, and a Law Degree from the Lincoln Law School of Sacramento.
"His knowledge and appreciation of the economic connection between traditional issues
such as water, public lands, energy, and the western environment was impressive," said
Rep. Oshiro.
"The committee was also interested in the examples of Mr. Ruiz's entrepreneurial
instincts that have resulted in the creation of the Border Legislative Conference. (BLC)
The conference has strengthened and defined the role of state legislatures on both sides of
the U.S.-Mexico border. The program has attracted the attention and support of the
United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and has provided an
opportunity for cross-border cooperation in a number of critical policy areas,‖ according
to Rep. Oshiro.
"In addition," Rep. Oshiro observed, "Edgar's role as staff to the Legislative Council on
River Governance that convenes legislators from the states of Washington, Oregon, Idaho
and Montana as well as the Province of British Columbia give him the kind of border to
border experience that on builds on CSG-WEST's leadership role in the creation of the
North American Summit."
Ruiz is married to his wife of 12 years, Aracely Ruiz. They have a two-year old daughter,
Sofia Ysabella.