if a member the public had an interest in their interests in the aps;
where can they go for the truth?
the leadership of the aps is a poor source of the truth.
as proved when it broadcast dishonestly edited records of board meetings to the community. as proved by their steadfast refusal to tell the truth about how tax dollars were spent on the uptown centre; or about the specific promises about the use of the building that were made to taxpayers; and were then broken.
the media is a poor source of the truth.
as proved by their steadfast refusal to investigate and report upon the leadership of the aps and its abject failure to protect the public interests from corruption and incompetence in the administration of the public schools.
the blogosphere must have its fair share of those who can no longer be relied upon to tell the truth.
as proved by their individual records.
the individual record of this blog(ger) is that it has yet to be challenged by anyone on any statement of fact regarding the ethics and accountability issues, incompetence and the corruption in the leadership of the aps.
1 comment:
The IPRA law states that we should be able to go to Mr. Rigo Chavez for ANY written truth that APS has in its possession anywhere, even in the hands of third party administrators. The law also states that electronic information, like emails, are also by law requestable.
The exceptions vary, including other exceptions in other parts of the code, but basically focus on things that would make a public entity vulnerable to terrorist attacks. So requesting some audio tapes of people asking for help from the APS Security-Police, or video tapes of an employee being attacked by four teenagers on campus, or unedited tapes of a board meeting, SHOULD BY LAW be turned over withing a fifteen day time limit, not fifteen working days, fifteen CONSECUTIVE days.
AG Madrid did an excellent primer on the subject. It explains specific examples of requests that SHALL be honored within the time limit; this advice, freely available on the State website, is routinely ignored by not just APS , but many public entities.
The part that they gamble on is that people will not have the money to pursue legal recourse under the same law, which allows for up to $100 per DAY the entity is late in delivering the requested documents. so, if they are late one year , thats a lot of damn cash.
IF you have the money to start a lawsuit up, pay expert witnesses, etc. So when they see disabled former employees with no obvious way of producing the 15 to 20 k it takes to hire a decent lawyer and get him/her started on a case these days, they pretty much blow us off on anything that could hurt them or be bad publicity. They do not wish to give us any rocks to throw at them.
Ok, sorry, just ranting and raving now. How did that Pink Floyd lyric go? "Thought I'd something more to say..."
J.H. Lopez
Post a Comment