the peter principle; the leadership of the aps

According to the Peter Principle;
"In a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence."

At that point, the employee performs incompetently until either their incompetence is mitigated, or they leave the organization.

The Council of the Great City Schools wrote about APSadministrative evaluations in a 2003 audit.

They wrote that APS administrative evaluations were "... subjective and unrelated to promotion or step placement ...".

In other words, the administrator(s) who decided to spend six million dollars renovating the uptown administrative complex; were not compelled by any systemic or institutional requirement, to prove by any objective measure; that they were competent to make decisions involving prioritizing the spending of millions of tax dollars.

The decision to prioritize the renovation of unnecessary facilities was not inconsequential;

Public power and resources are rather desperately needed at the "educational interface".

It is the place where taxpayers expect that their tax dollars will be spent.

Instead they were spent at the uptown complex. there is no place in the aps that is further from the educational interface than the office on the top of the uptown center. there is no place further from the interface, where an "education" tax dollar can be spent.

In order to be successful, an organization must address administrative corruption and incompetence. the most direct and logical approach is to objectively evaluate administrative performance, and then act according to the results. It is a solution that will inspire the public confidence that continued stonewalling will not.

You can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs. (everyone's mother)

corruption and incompetence cannot be eliminated from public service except by exposing corruption and incompetence.

corruption and incompetence will not be exposed except by exposing the corrupt and the incompetent.

and if the audit is honest, the corrupt and incompetent will be held accountable for their corruption and incompetence.

It is only those who cannot pass an audit, who will resist an audit.


Power does not corrupt.
The opportunity to except one's self from accountability, corrupts;
absolutely.

Transparent accountability is fatal to corruption and incompetence.


Almost four years after the CotGCS audit, the leadership of the APS has produced no proof, even in response to a NMIPRA request for public records; of policy changes that addressed the cited issues.

They have produced no proof that the leadership of the aps ever did anything, except to ignore the results of the audit.

They can produce no evidence that any one of them is honestly accountable to any meaningful standard of conduct, by a system overw hich they have no control; and against their will.

Because they aren't.