everitt is set to dodge the bullet

at the last board meeting, the question of an administrative accountability audit was placed on the record. well it turns out it wasn't actually entered on the "official" record.

the "official" record of the board meeting amounts to "notes" taken by somebody ultimately accountable to school board president paula maes/modrall. the board has refused to explain why the incontrovertibly accurate videotaped record, is not the "official" record.

at any rate, and for unexplained reasons; the "notes" on the last meeting, do not include any mention of an administrative audit.

according to juris mustelidae (legal weaselry); if the question of an audit isn't in the "official" record; then it has not"really" been brought up at all. and beth everitt is not required by board policy to offer a response to the question of an audit at the next meeting, which is tomorrow night.

normally, the leadership of the aps does not answer questions at board meetings.

the less cynical would point out that it is only fair, to allow them time to think about a response.
the more cynical would point out that they are only obeying a rule that they created, as an excuse not to answer inconvenient questions at all.

never the less, if a question does make it onto the record, the leadership always promises to "get back with an answer".

well tomorrow night is time enough to get back with an answer on the audit; if only it had been asked for "officially".

and when everitt doesn't get back to us about the audit, during her presentation;

the less cynical will say that maybe two weeks is not long enough to prepare a response.

the more cynical will point out that neither that excuse nor any other, will be offered to stakeholders.

everitt will stonewall the question of an audit for at least one more board meeting.

both newspapers will have reporters at the meeting; they usually do.
and, as they usually do, neither will report on everitt's failure to stand up and be held accountable for her administration of the public resources in the aps.

in fairness, it might not be the reporters fault. I suspect the decision to cover up the aps mess, comes from higher up at the journal and trib.

although everitt went on live radio recently and announced her support for any audit of her administration; that too, was not an "official" personal commitment. she cannot be compelled, based on the public announcement, to actually do anything about an audit.

her intention to stand down at tomorrow's board meeting would seem to indicate that she intends not to live up to the commitment that she made on kkob radio.

if everitt has been doing her job, an audit will vindicate her administration.

but then, if she had been doing her job the audit would have already been done.

that an accountability audit is an anomaly, and not a tradition, is a product of beth everitt's leadership; she is the chief administrative officer