Monday, April 30, 2007

APS leadership answers the Trib's request for public records

The Tribune asked the leadership of the APS for the records from investigations of alleged public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the administration of the APS Police Department.

It wasn't an NMIPRA request, which would have been way to uppity.

The leadership of the APS told their reporter; you can't have them. They are public records which are excepted from surrender according to the NMIPRA; "...citing confidentiality under personnel protections.

The Tribune accepted and printed their justification without reading, apparently, the NMIPRA.

The NMIPRA provides ten specific exceptions to the law. No one of them sounds remotely like; public servants enjoy some special exceptions or personnel protections by virture of their public inservitude; quite the opposite.

Never the less, the Trib bought it; hook, line, and sinker;

and the leadership of the APS is off the hook, as far as the Trib is concerned, for public corruption and criminal conspriracy in their efforts to keep public records from public knowledge.

Only this time the AG is watching. And he really expects to be notified if the the investigation by his office is obfuscated by the the leadership of the APS.

Maxwell Smart had a dome of silence

to separate on the record, and off the record.

APS/Modral has a dome that separates public records from public knowledge.

They call it;

litigation until ordered to do otherwise, by a court of competent jurisdiction, and only after exhausting all possible appeals.
Public resources fund egregiously expensive litigation in order to enable senior APS administrators and board members to evade accountability for their corruption and incompetence.


Smart's dome was a joke.


APS and Modral's dome is;
public corruption and criminal conspiracy.

Free speech; not so free speech

Please understand how monumental will be the vote on the fate of the public forum.

As a matter of board policy; it will or will not be part of the public record. Participants will or will not be allowed to ask legitimate questions on any subject.

The vote is to respect free speech; or to prohibit it.

Corruption and incompetence will be enabled by prohibiting free speech. Citizens have a right to petition their government; they have a right to stand face to face with their public servants and demand answers to legitimate questions;

  • why won't you surrender public records of investigations of public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the leadership of the APS?
  • why won't you surrender an honest accounting of the uptown administrative complex?
  • why won't you commission an impartial (forensic) audit of the administration of the APS?
  • why can you show no proof that you are honestly accountable to any meaningful standard of conduct in your public service?
  • why will you not lead by your example; by holding yourself honestly accountable to the student standard of conduct?
There are members of the leadership of the APS who do not want those questions asked on the record. They do not want those questions asked off the record either. They want no record at all, of the fact that when they are asked to provide any proof at all that they have protected public resources from corruption and incompetence; the answer is no; and so they stonewall.

They intend to pass a policy that effectively eliminates the opportunity for citizens to ask questions about the use of power and resources that are fundamentally their own.

The servant will tell the master, what the master can do with plans for transparent accountability to a meaningful standard of conduct. It begins by rolling them into a very tight cylinder, and then sticking them up your ass.

There was a time in the history of our country when (wo)men would have said; over my dead body. And they meant it; in fact they proved that they meant it.

They would have showed up at the board meeting to stand up for what they believe in, for two minutes.

I've told the story about how we used to give tee shirts to kids that read; stand up for what you believe in; even if you are standing alone.

And then we went ahead and let them; stand alone that is. No adult behind them offering support; no adult beside them sharing the burden; no adult in front of them leading by their personal example.

And we wonder why they tore up the aquarium.


Any public servant in the APS who is not willing to hold themselves honestly accountable to the standard of conduct that they established and enforce upon students;
should resign rather immediately.

They won't though. Instead they will rewrite board policy to dis include the rights to free speech and a public forum that is on the record; so they won't have to listen to the question any more. To evade accountability for having evaded accountability.


I'm not saying these folks are evil. But when Burke wrote
all that is necessary for evil to prevail in the world,
is for good men to do nothing;
this is what he meant.

Evil doesn't prevail in the world, so much as it fills a vacuum left by those who don't care enough to push back, if pushing back requires some sacrifice.

Sacrifice is the currency of commitment. Any belief that does not warrant sacrifice in its defense, will fall, absolutely.

The right to free speech will fall Wednesday; not because of the strong argument against it; but by the lack of any argument in its support.

Two hundred years ago people fought to establish the right to petition the goverment.
Apparenly that right will now be simply given away,
because nobody will stand in its defense.

But then, two hundred years ago, Ben Franklin and others were able to spread the truth by means of newspapers.

Sunday, April 29, 2007

APS School Board Member's mettle to be tested.

Wednesday,late afternoon, uptown; a vote will be taken. Whatever else is true about that vote; so is the following:

The vote will take place during the workday; at a time and in a place that is convenient for the leadership of the APS; but not for many other stakeholders.

In stark constrast to a time when board meetings were held in the evening, and at a number of different locations in their school board districts.

At those meetings there was a public forum; at which a citizen could exercise the right to speak to their representative on the board. The public forum was on the record; and there were no unjustifiable limitations on freedom of speech. They never tried to claim any right to refuse to allow questions to be asked as an expression of free speech.

The current board is going to vote to change board policy. They seek to "legalize", their previous misconduct and efforts to deny the exercise of free speech rights during public forums.

They have previously broadcast deliberately falsified records of board meetings.

They are voting to permanently remove the public forum from the public record.

They are voting to limit the topics at the public forum, to only those issues that are on the(ir) agenda.

They are doing this in order to avoid a public record of their refusal, by stonewalling, to answer the following question:

As a public servant, as a steward of the public trust and treasure, as a senior role model for 98,000 of our student sons and daughters; will you hold yourself accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct?

Will you, in your public service, hold yourself accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct; by a system over which you have no control; and even against your will; for eight measly hours a day?
Any answer except yes is no.

There is only one reason not to answer the question. It is because the answer is no.

If the leadership of the APS; as senior role models for students, were expected to hold themselves accountable to the student standard of conduct; they would be expected to answer the question. But they are not required to answer the question, because they are no longer accountable to the student standard of conduct; because they struck the following language from their own standard of conduct;
in no case shall the standard for an adult be lower than the standard for students.
They are not accountable to the student standard of conduct by their own deliberate actions.

The leadership of the APS enforces a standard of conduct upon students that they will not enforce upon themselves.

They are modeling only hypocrisy.

They are not accountable to any meaningful standard of conduct. In truth, they are not accountable to the law; the lowest standard of acceptable conduct. Public money and the Modral Law Firm have excepted the leadership of the APS from accountability, even to the law.

They are going to take a vote Wednesday. Denying the right of citizens to petition their goverment on any issue and on the record; is a diametically opposite action to transparent accountability; which includes the right of citizens to petition their goverment on any issue, and on the record.

What ever else they say they are "voting" on, they are really voting on;
continued covert evasion of accountability, even to the law,
or,
transparent accountability to a meaningful standard of conduct.

The choice is clear.

And so is the meaning of the vote cast by each member of the board.

For what it's worth; I demand a roll call vote.

For what it's worth; I demand that the Journal and the Trib investigate and report upon this issue in time for voters to hold their elected representatives accountable for the conduct and their competence; at the school board meeting Wednesday.

Darren White's hinky answers

I asked Bernalillio County Sheriff Darren White for some public records. I asked for the public records which would show that the Leadership of the APS had used BCSO computers and privileges to do illegal background searches.

I sent the request to him with the expressed expectation that he would forward the request to the custodian of public records for the BCSO.

Either he is the BCSO custodian of public records; or he just decided to handle the request himself. His response to the request was, "We have no documents that are responsive to your request."

To which I replied, "It is difficult for me to believe that you are claiming that there is no record of aps police using BCSO computers to do illegal background checks. Are you claiming that they are privileged in some way? Do you claim a privileged document log?"

To which he responded, "If you are requesting information regarding computer background checks, you will need to make that request to the Bernalillo County Manager. The county Communication Center is not under my command. You can make your request to:Bernalillo County Office of the County Manager, One Civic Plaza,10th Floor
Albuquerque, NM. 87102"

To which I responded, " I am not requesting information regarding computer background checks. I am looking for the records of which APS administrator or police officer, or other, used BCSO computers to do the illegal background checks; like the one where your computer was used to do an illegal background check on some APS administrators girl friend. Is there no log of you uses your computers to do background checks?

To which he is yet to respond. But I think that you can see that the request for public records of the leadership of the APS and their alleged criminal misuse of computers for which the sheriff is responsible; is going badly.

As is the coincidental request, that I made of him, for public records of BCSO arrests or investigations of APS administrators or board members; and their ultimate determination.

Not coincidently, Sheriff Darren White will be legitimizing the upcoming "review" of the allegedly corrupt APS Police Department administration, (including the alleged criminal misuse of his own computers).

Neither he, nor APD Chief Shultz, will address the apparent conflict of interest presented by their legitimizing a review which should reasonably include the investigation of the illegal use of law enforcement computers; possibly with at least their "tacit" approval.

Saturday, April 28, 2007

there should be a townhall meeting at the next board meeting

At that townhall meeting the leadership of the APS will stand for questions. They will answer questions candidly, honestly, forthrightly; and on the record.

They will answer questions such as the following:

  • will you provide an honest accounting of the uptown administrative complex?
  • will you surrender all previous audits of the leadership of the APS, to public knowledge?
  • will you make public knowledge of the public records of the investigations of alleged public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the administration of the APS Police Force?
  • Will you explain, defend, or even acknowledge the fact that the public record of the leadership of the APS, is one of evading accountability to any meaningful standard of conduct?
  • Will you explain, defend, or even acknowledge your decision not to commission a (forensic) audit of the administration of the APS?
  • Will you explain, defend, or even acknowledge that you removed from your own code of conduct the words; in no case shall the standard for an adult be lower than the standard for students.
  • Will you explain, defend, or even acknowledge that deliberately falsified records of board meetings were broadcast to the community?
  • Will you explain, defend, or even acknowledge your decision to spend public monies in support of litigation to defeat the NMIPRA in order to conceal evidence of public corruption and criminal conspiracy?
  • Will you explain, defend, or even acknowledge the privilege that allows you to refuse to explain, defend, or acknowledge anything?

"no comment" ... sez who?

all it takes is a few hundred people standing up for what they believe in for two minutes; at a board meeting.

Recommendation Regarding Public Forum

There is an item on the agenda for next Wednesday's board meeting. It is called recommendations regarding public forum. You must link to it from the board agenda. APS does not make it possible for me to provide a link for you.

If you read it, you will find that after due consideration by the Policy committee; they cannot decide whether it is better to deny people the right to ask questions on the record; before the meeting or after the meeting. An experiment has been proposed; the public forum will be off the record for a while after the meetings.

At that point a determination will be made whether it is better to ignore the right to petition elected officials, before or after meetings.

From the minutes; it looks like Paula Maes and Modral; are trying to slip in language that limits the right to speak, to only items on the agenda. If the board doesn’t place an issue on the agenda, not only will people not be allowed to ask questions on the record, they will not be allowed to ask questions at all, if the board won't put them on the agenda.

Can you imagine Paula Maes putting this question on the agenda, so that it can be asked?

How much money do you and Modral make every year; litigating for aps leaderhip, evasion from accountability even to the law?

Voting unanimously in favor of continuing to keep the forum off of the agenda, and limiting comments only to issues on the agenda, were ,Paula Maes and her loyalists; Robert Lucero and Delores Griego. You will remember Robert Lucero as the board member who tabled the motion that would have required him, and APS leadership, to answer legitimate questions on the record. Mary Lee’s constituents will be disappointed to learn the she voted along with Maes and Modral as well.

On the Administrative side; this new policy is the brain child of Beth Everitt, Nelinda Venegas, Susie Peck, Rigo Chavez, Bill Moffatt, Brad Winters, DeeDee Stroud, and Andie Trybus.

It appears that the senior administration also looks forward to the time that not only will they not have to take questions on the record; they will not have to take questions in public at all; without their preapproval.

There is no justification to move the public forum off the public record; and to limit the scope of questions; except to evade accountability for corruption and incompetence as public servants.

If there were any justification at all, they would offer it; they would defend themselves.

Continuing shame on the yet to be indentified, decision makers at the Journal and the Trib, who will not investigate or report upon an egregious betrayal of the public trust by the leadership of the public schools.

NMIPRA; the scary part

first source; second page


The Inspection of Public Records Act is intended to provide the public with access to information about governmental affairs. Open government is a crucial aspect of a functioning democracy.

The law requires public access to virtually all public records. While there are a few legitimate exceptions, most are available for public inspection. We encourage public officials to be liberal in providing public access and to honor all reasonable and legitimate requests for records. They know that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

Responsibility for enforcement of this Act lies with individual citizens, the District Attorneys and the Attorney General.


Realistically; who is going to have a chance against APS and Modral in a Second Judicial District Courtroom?

The Attorney General? one would hope.

The District Attorney? maybe.

The private citizen? a snowball’s chance in hell.

Because the Attorney General and the District Attorneys cannot be everywhere, it is imperative that private citizens enforce their right to public records.

How exactly?

by throwing themselves in front of a bus?

NMAGO and the IPRA

Your first source; Inspection of Public Records Act here quoted in significant part.

The Inspection of Public Records Act is a New Mexico state law that provides an open window for the public and media to access information deemed of import to the public interest. This is one of the basic rights of our democratic society, Open Government. The law requires open access to almost all public records in state and local government with few exceptions. Under the Act the public citizen or group has the right to take legal action if they are denied access to public records and awards attorney fee's if they are proven right. This provides a mechanism to empower the public and it saves limited public resources.

The Attorney General is provided authority through the state constitution to enforce this act, as are the local District Attorneys. As a public service we have made available our Compliance Guide in its entirety and it can be reviewed by section online or printed for full review. Topics covered by this Act include the description of which records are covered, the assignment of a custodian of record, how confidential materials are addressed, as well as the impact of other laws. Also found here are the method to request records, the procedure of inspection, and the procedure for denied requests. While the enforcement of the act is described here if you have any questions you may contact the Civil Division of the Office of the Attorney General for further information at (505) 827-6070.

By which it is meant; the leadership of the APS enjoys no exception to the law. Their records of public corruption and criminal conspriracy in their administration of the APS; are public records.

The Attorney General is provided authority through the state constitution to enforce the IPRA and to defend one of the basic rights of our democratic society; open government; open access to public records.

The Attorney General has the authority to enforce the law; the complainant does not.

The Attorney General has the power to defend the basic right of open government; the complainant does not.

The Attorney General can made APS and Modral make public knowledge of public records; the complainant can not.

NMAGO Civil Division

Civil Division for the first source; here quoted in significant part.

Citizen’s rights to governmental access are set out in New Mexico law through the Open Meetings Act (OMA) and the Inspection of Public Records Act (IPRA), otherwise known as “sunshine laws”. As one of the vital goals of the Attorney General’s Office, educating New Mexico residents with regard to their rights under these laws represent a substantial amount of the work of the Civil Division. Civil Division staff travel to every corner of the state to inform and answer questions from municipal and county government officials and staff, school board members and administration personnel, and other board and commission members in addition to the general public. Underscoring the importance of these laws, the Civil Division also produces Compliance Guides to inform interested parties about the requirements and applicability of the acts.

On occasion, various individuals and groups become concerned that bodies subject to the OMA and IPRA have violated these laws. The Attorney General’s Office is the authority charged with enforcing these Acts. The Civil Division responds to complaints from elected officials, concerned citizens and other groups regarding these sunshine laws. The Division will initiate upon request an inquiry concerning the complaints to gather necessary information and make a determination on the validity of the complaint. Once the determination is complete the Division will act to ensure that compliance with the law is achieved.
Please contact our office if we may be of assistance to you or you require further information. We can be reached by calling (505) 827-6070 or by facsimile at (505) 827-6989. We look forward to serving you!
By which it is meant; because education is one of the vital goals of the Attorney General’s Office; it would seem that if the leadership of the APS, and their lawyers are ignorant of the requirements of the NMIPRA; it is by their deliberate choice.

And by which it is meant; the Attorney General’s Office is the authority charged with enforcing these Acts an will initiate upon request, an inquiry into the allegation that the leadership of the APS has, and intends to continue to violate the law. And that NMAGO will gather necessary information and make a determination on the validity of the complaint.

And once the NMAGO has determined that the leadership of the APS has violated the law by denying public knowledge of public records; and when it has been shown that the public trust and treasure has been spent evading the requirements of the NMIPRA; once that determination is complete; the Division will act to ensure that compliance with the law is achieved.

And the leadership of the APS will be held accountable for their conduct and competence as public servants.

Monumental as that circumstance is certain to be;
it is unworthy of investigation or report according to
whom at the Journal?
and whom at the Trib?

there are ongoing taxpayer costs

As a direct result of the alleged corruption in the APS Police Department Administration; taxpayers are incurring ongoing costs.

Gil Lovato will earn $300 a day until his career ends in June. Taxpayers have received nothing in return for his salary, at least since January.

Elizabeth Everitt will earn upwards of $700 a day for as long as the bread crumbs that allegedly lead from Lovato's desk to Savage's, to Everitt's, can be concealed.

The Modral Law Firm; and School Board President Paula Maes, will make between $300 and $1,000 dollars an hour to provide immunity for administrators, board members, and Modral; from the consequences for deliberately violating the law in order to conceal public records.

I suspect that taxpayers will be footing Sam Bregman's bill as well.

And there are the inherent losses due to corruption, incompetence, and waste. The financial cost of public corruption and incompetence is not insignificant.

There are human losses in teachers and administrators; men and women of competence and character, who will leave the APS rather than live with their guilty knowledge of corruption and incompetence, or because they realize finally, you can't teach in spite of them.

Public corruption and incompetence waste public resources.

It must be costing taxpayers something to keep this out of the news.

When I asked the leadership of the APS for the opportunity to inspect and or copy the financial records of public money spent on the newspapers; when I asked them under the auspices of the NMIPRA; if they would reveal how many tax dollars were now in the hands of the people who decide what truth gets printed;

the answer was no.

Friday, April 27, 2007

in a nutshell

On the question of accountability for conduct and competence in the leadership of the APS; and in general for all public servants in their public service;

the choice is this:

We can permit corruption and incompetence
by allowing the covert, often illegal, always unethical evasion of accountability to any meaningful standard of conduct, by (powerful) public servants; or,
We can prohibit corruption and incompetence
by demanding transparent accountability to a meaningful standard of conduct.





it hardly seems like a choice.

so where exactly, is the boggle?

I stand corrected

NM Attorney General Gary King claims sponsorship only of the "modern" NMIPRA in his response to my question regarding his sponsorship of the NMIPRA,

With regard to the NM Inspection of Public Records Act, I usually state that I sponsored the modern version of IPRA. The original act noting that public records should be available to the public was passed around 40 years ago. However, there was really no mechanism that would allow the public a process for obtaining those records in an organized way. What we added were definitions of public records and the requirement that each agency have a records custodian. We also set some time deadlines for compliance with a request, either by delivering the documents or specifically enumerating one of the statutory exceptions applicable to a denial of delivery. One of the goals of our office is to have ongoing training for records custodians (since there are likely to be new ones coming on board on a regular basis) so they will understand and comply with their obligations under the statute.


The Attorney General also wrote; "I note that you are now in touch with Mona from my office. She will keep me posted on the progress of your complaint."

The Attorney General remains engaged, on the record.


The significance of that cannot be over estimated;
history is being made.

This could be the beginning of the end
of the culture of corruption in NM politics.

when all is said and done;

more is said than done.

The leadership of the APS says they want to improve communication; their record is of hiring more spin doctors for the communications center; abolishing citizen advisory groups; and feigning incompetence as the underlying excuse for a website that is all but useless.

The leadership of the APS says they are transparent; yet they will not allow, nor will they respond to questions on the record, they will not furnish an honest accounting of the uptown center, and they will not surrender public records.

Public servants are writing the terms of public service.
Their terms allow the covert evasion of accountability to any meaningful standard of conduct.

Their terms are against the public interest;
and they are unacceptable.

The public should not be paying the costs of litigating
the effective defeat of a state statute, the NMIPRA,
without their knowledge and against their interests.



Responsibility for the "...without their knowledge" part falls upon the shoulders of the
anonymous decision makers at the Journal and the Trib.

Thursday, April 26, 2007

My letter of complaint to the NMAGO

The leadership of the APS, and their custodian of public records Rigo Chavez, control public records of investigations into allegations of public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the administration of the Albuquerque Public Schools; including but not limited to the investigations specifically related to the APS Police Department.

I made requests for those records on 4/11, 4/16, 4/19.

I received one response which denied the 4/11 request based on a feigned abject ignorance of the law.

The other two requests have been so far, ignored.

I will fax and email documentary corroboration as soon as an investigator is assigned.

The leadership of the APS intends to keep evidence of their public corruption and criminal conspiracy secret from public knowledge by means of exploiting weaknesses in the NMIPRA. The will use public funds for lawyers and litigation to evade accountability to the NMIPRA.

It is my firm belief that the NMAGO must remain integrally involved in the resolution of this complaint.

There will be formidable resistance to its principled resolution.

Batting for team NMAGO will be

Assisstant Attorney General, Mona Valicenti

who was kind enough to email me her address rather than my continue to prevail upon the Attorney General's personal attention. He has done and is doing his part by not ignoring the allegation.

I emailed to her, my particulars and expressed my interest in being helpful to her in any way that I could.

It looks like we're starting to pick sides.

Update; AAG Valicenti may not be batting; that decision gets made based on the particulars, which will be forwarded asap.
Update on the update. AAG Valicenti remains in the batters box.
Update on the update on the update; the complaint will be investigated by Laverne Roller; administrative assistant.

There is not transparent accountability

in the administration of the public schools;
by some one's deliberate decision.

Why not transparent accountability to a meaningful standard of conduct?

Those who oppose transparent accountability in public service have prevailed; never having stood up and argued their position. Nobody ever stood up against transparent accountability; it just lost. They were never given exception from accountability; they simply assumed it.

Never once, have they been compelled to explain, defend,or even acknowledge the decision to except powerful public servants from accountability to any meaningful standard of conduct.



How can they simply "refuse to comment" on what they have done?

Are they privileged?

"no comment"

is not an acceptable answer from a public servant about their public service.

They cannot be allowed to simply refuse to answer legitimate questions.

It flies in the face of the fundamental notion of in-servitude. It is not reasonably their choice to write the terms of their in-servitude.

They cannot be allowed stonewalling about their public service; as an accceptable term of their public service.

It has been 110 days since

since it became public knowledge that there were allegations of public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the APS Police Department administration, and by logical extension, in the entire administration of the APS.

A few days after that, Tom Savage, ordered APS employees to keep their mouths shut. The implications of that statement are; any APS employee/public servant can be fired pretty much on the spot, if they tell the truth about public corruption in the APS.

This is what the CoGCS audit meant when they referred to APS' culture of fear of retaliation and retribution.

A few days after that, investigations began and the truth was compiled.

With very, very few legitimate exceptions; that information is a public record and is subject to the NMIPRA.

The public records are in the possession of the leadership of the APS and Modral.

Those public records are the subject of three NMIPRA requests.

All three requests are now out of compliance with the law. One has been denied by feigned abject incompetence; and two have been ignored.

The law specifically requires the leadership of the APS to make public records, public knowledge. They are required to allow the inspection of all public records surrounding investigations of allegations of public corruption in the administration and leadership of the APS.

Representing them in court; the school board president's law firm; Modral.

They will use dollars originally destined for education, for an entirely different purpose. They will be used to defeat the NMIPRA.

Standing in opposition; a retired shop teacher and founding aps character counts trainer.

Standing in opposition as well (?), a former state legislator who sponsored the original NMIPRA, and who is now the Attorney General of the State of New Mexico; Gary King.

NMAG King is unique in that he is still the only public figure to stand on the record and recognize the allegations of public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the leadership of the APS. And further, to attach his name and reputation to the principled resolution of the allegations.

Bill Richardson; if he were here, would not stand on the record in support of the principled resolution of the allegations. He would not demand the surrender of public records.

Nor will Mayor Martin Chavez; despite his previously professed concern over APS accountability.

Nor will any City Councilor, APS School Board Member, APS Senior Administrator, nor Chamber of Commerce President Terri Cole.

Nor, of course, will either the Journal or the Trib.

I will bow to any controverting fact.

Wednesday, April 25, 2007

The founding fathers must be spinning in their graves.

I had asked the nm aclu to examine the practice of public servants refusing to take questions on the record.

There is a great deal of difference between
a question that is asked on the record,
and one that is not.

The right to petition has been removed from the record because the leadership of the APS does not want a record of their response when asked this particular question;

as a public servant, as a steward of the public trust and treasure; and as a role model for 98,000 students;
Will you hold yourself honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct, by a system over which you have no control, and even against your will?
Their response on a dozen occasions was no.
  • They will not respond to the question by admitting the truth.
  • They will not surrender the public record of their evasion of honest accountability.
  • They have renounced their obligation as role models of the student standard of conduct.
  • Their record is one only of evading accountability.
  • There is no plausible denial.
  • They cannot even lie "legally."
They lack the moral courage to hold themselves accountable for their conduct.

So they fall back upon the only defense of an indefensible position; stonewall.

They want their stonewalling off the record. There is no other plausible explanation for moving the public forum off of the public record.

In any case, the result is the same; the public no longer has the right to ask legitimate questions of public servants, on the record.

Our right to petition our government is among rights guaranteed and protected by our constitution and our government.

Since there are countries where those who seek to petition their government are stuffed into wood chippers; the right to petition seems fairly important; a right worth defending.

The ACLU indicated that public servants refusing to take legitimate questions on the record, is "legally" acceptable and cannot be challenged.



Houston ...we have a problem.

the Lynch Tillman hearings

have proven that the goverment, public servants, are capable and willing to deliberately mislead the public.

Of the emotions that that reality provokes; surprise should not be one.

You should not be surprised to find out that you have been deliberately deceived by a public servant. It is not surprising because, public servants are not accountable to any standard of conduct that prohibits deliberate deception.

Take for instance the leadership of the APS;
they deliberately distorted the truth about their own conduct as public servants at board meetings; and then broadcast those distortions to the community in order to create a false impression.

And there is no way to hold them accountable; not as public servants, and not as the senior rolemodels for 98,000 of our sons and daughters.

They are excepted from accountability to any meaningful standard of conduct and competence, by the energetic litigation of the Modral Law Firm, and their access to unlimited taxpayer support for education.

Paula Maes is accustomed to privilege

Because she is the President of the Character Counts Leadership Council;

the council has offered no resistance to the abandonment of the Pillars of Character Counts as the standard of conduct for adult role models in the APS.
Because she is the President of the Albuquerque Public Schools Board of Education;
she can prevent any investigation or attention to corruption, incompetence, and their enabling practices in the leadership and administration of the APS; including but not limited to preventing an impartial (forensic) audit of the leadership of the APS.
Because she is married to the President of the Modral Law Firm
she is immune to the requirements of the NMIPRA, and most other laws.
Because she is the President of the NM Broadcasters Association
none of this will be investigated or reported upon by the media.
Because she is privileged,
she will never have to explain, defend or even acknowledge the issues of public corruption, incompetence, and criminal conspriracy in the leadership and administration of the APS.

it is not surprising that Everritt/Maes/Modral

want to suppress the truth about investigations of public corruption in the APS Police Department, and their personal responsibilities and involvement.

it is surprising, and more than a little disappointing,
that it is apparently so easy to do.

  • The results of the investigations are public records.
  • The law requires that they be surrendered.
  • Everitt/Maes/Modral are ignoring the law in full view of the state's attorney general.


and the Journal and Trib.

from the District's website

"At the end of May, the Council of Great City Schools will do a review of the APS Police Department and will make any recommendations on how to make schools safer for our students. We thank APD Chief Ray Schultz and Sheriff Darren White for being part of the team that reviews the department. We look forward to receiving the recommendations and implementing any changes that need to be made."


The scope of the "review" by the CoGCS is being narrowed; "...how to make schools safer for our students."

So unless someone who is part of the "review" successfully argues that public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the administration of the APS Police Department directly affects student safety, an unlikely prospect; the "review" will provide no illumination of corruption and incompetence; and will provide for no accountability for those in positions of responsibility and trust.

Still on board; Ray Schultz and Darren White; neither of whom acknowledge the conflict of interest in investigating the alleged criminal misuse of computers and databases entrusted to them.

perfect

Mayor Martin Chavez joined the fray

when he complained on the record about the lack of accountability in the leadership of the APS.

He wasn't dragged in, he wasn't tricked in, he joined of his own volition. He underscored his concern of the lack of accountability in the leadership of the APS by trying to assume control over the school board; fightin' words if ever there were.

So where is he now? The problems in the leadership have not been mitigated. If anything they have gotten worse because they are so egregious, so blatant, and so "in your face".

  • the refusal to provide an accounting of the uptown administrative complex
  • the refusal to surrender the public record of public corruption in the APS Police Department
  • the removal of the public forum from the public record
  • the disbanding of parent advisory groups
  • the abdication of responsibilities as role models
  • the lack of evidence of accountability to any meaningful standard of conduct; even the law
  • the refusal to provide meaningful transparency in the administration of the public trust and treasure
  • the stonewalling on the issues of ethics and accountability
  • the stonewalling on a district wide (forensic) administrative accountability audit.
If Martin Chavez genuinely supports honest accountability to some meaningful standard of conduct for the leadership of the APS; if he genuinely wants to solve the problem once and for all; where is he now?

All he has to do to provide for honest accountability to a meaningful standard of conduct for APS leadership; is to draw public attention to an APS Administrative Accountability Audit.

If he stood on the record and said, It is time for a (forensic) audit of the public interests in the APS, there would be an audit. The corrupt and incompetent would be exposed and removed. Corruption and incompetence in the leadership of the APS would be a thing of the past.

He won't. At least two possibilities exist;
  1. he lacks either the conviction or the courage to deliver the coup de grace on the corrupt and the incompetent in the leadership of the APS
  2. he and his administration cannot pass an audit of their own; and so he cannot afford to bring any attention to the issue of administrative accountability audits, in general.

Less clear; is the motivation of the Journal and the Trib.

It is difficult to speculate accurately on the source of the cover up by the newspapers. Neither Charlie Moore, nor Phill Casaus will identify the person(s) at their paper who is personally responsible for the decision not to investigate or report upon public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the leadership of the APS.

The higher ups are always content let underlings take the blame; shite rolls downhill. They are content to let the reporters who have neither investigated, nor reported upon the ethics scandal in the leadership of the APS, be the fall guys. They are content to let them be the victims of assumptions that they are either, in over their heads; or in up to their eyeballs; they can't write the truth; or they won't write the truth.

They will take one for the team, and the person really responsible for the aid and abet of the cover up will remain unidentified, ....and un-accountable.

...and then we wonder why kids tear up aquariums.

Tuesday, April 24, 2007

transparency

The leadership of the APS claims transparency. If you ask Beth Everitt if her administration is transparent; she will say that it is.

I would argue that for as long as she refuses to answer legitimate questions on the record, she can not claim credit for transparency in even its smallest measure.

She cannot claim any transparency at all for as long as she stonewalls legitimate questions.

  • Why are you no longer accountable to the student standard of conduct?
  • Why will you not provide a candid, honest, and forthright accounting of the uptown administrative complex?
  • Why will you not surrender the truth about public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the administration of the APS Police; and by extension the administration of the entire APS?
  • Why will you not commission a (forensic) audit of the public interests in the APS?

Bernalillo County Sheriff Darren White

has been sent a request for public records.

He, by and through the BCSO custodian of public records, has been asked to surrender the public records he has on the alleged criminal misuse of his computers by the leadership of the APS.

He has also been asked for any public records of complaints made against Gil Lovato, or other senior APS administrators or board members.

The county's top cop has been asked to obey the law; the NMIPRA.

He has three days to surrender public records to public knowledge; or to deny the request.

BCSO/APS conflict of interest

Bernalillo County Sheriff, Darren White, is scheduled to participate in an investigation of the APS Police Department.

Concurrently, there are allegations of public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the administration of the APS Police.

However narrowly the leadership of the APS wants to narrow the focus of any "review"; it is difficult to imagine that the two investigations will coincide.

Therefore, at some point Sheriff White would be in the situation of investigating allegations that computers for which he is responsible, were used illegally by the leadership of the APS; and with his consent.

He will be investigating himself. It is a conflict of interest. He continues to refuse to acknowledge, on the record, the conflict of interest.

The Chief of the Albuquerque Police Department, is also scheduled to participate in the investigation. He also refuses to make a statement on the record about the possible illegal use of APD computers by the leadership of the APS.

who enforces the NMIPRA?

Enforcing the NMIPRA; from the AG’s commentary;

Responsibility for enforcement of this Act lies with individual citizens, the District Attorneys and the Attorney General. In giving citizens the right to sue if they are denied access to records and awarding them attorneys fees when they are successful, the legislature wisely created a large number of "private attorneys general" to help enforce the Act. This concept of private attorneys general is a tried-and-true American legal mechanism by which legislators ensure enforcement of important public policies when public funds and public officials' resources are limited. Because the Attorney General and the District Attorneys cannot be everywhere, it is imperative that private citizens enforce their right to public records.

You have the absolute right as a citizen
to sue APS/Modral for public records.

You have the right to jump in front of a speeding bus;

with similar effect; and in about the same time frame.

resetting the piece; NMIPRA

4/11) a public records request was filed for records of complaints against a specific public servant, with the APS EOSO.

4/12) the date of a snail mail that did not arrive until 4/14, denying the request.

the denial is based on a feigned ignorance of the law. They are pretending to misunderstand the exception for letters and memorandums of opinion.

4/16 pm) The public records request was enlarged to include the records of current, even ongoing, investigations of alleged public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the leadership of the APS Police Department.

4/19 pm) The public records request was enlarged to meet the expressed needs of NM Attorney General, Gary King. The request for records now includes all records of the responses of the leadership of APS/Modral to public records requests. Also, an honest accounting of the public resources expended through Modral in an effort to defeat the NMIPRA and OMA in the "legal" system.

APS was asked to compile a candid, forthright and honest public record, and then to surrender it to the office of the Attorney General.

The Atttorney General has acknowledged his acceptance of responsibility for the principled resolution of these complaints.

The leadership of the APS has yet to acknowledge
...anything.

not overspending at the uptown administrative complex,
not the deliberate falsification of board meeting records,
not the denial of the public's right to petition them on the record,
not their abdication as role models for students,
not the observations and recommendations of any previous audit,
not their deliberate decision to subject whistle blowers who expose ethical misconduct, to continued retribution and retaliation,

nor will they acknowledge the need for an immediate and impartial (forensic) audit of the leadership of the APS.

the answer is: Silence gives consent

The question is:

does anyone mind that the leadership of the APS
is not honestly accountable
to any meaningful standard of conduct?

Juris Mustelidae (revisited)

At some point; a bunch of people sat around a campfire and decided that it was in their collective best interests to govern themselves with laws and accountability to those laws; juris.

Before the ink was dry (actually before the mud tablet was dry) exception was created; Juris Mustelidae; the practice of juris by weasels, in order to except the privileged class from accountability to juris.

There really is a privileged class. Chief among their privileges is their personal exception to accountability.

The leadership of the APS is interested in evading accountability for public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the adminisistration of the APS Police Department; and by extension, the in the leadership of the APS.

They are dodging accountability by suppressing evidence. The evidence exists in the form of public records created by an independent investigation into public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the administration of the APS Police Department.

The law requires that these public records be open for inspection and or copying.

The leadership of the APS is refusing to make these public records,public knowledge, in blatant violation of the New Mexico Inspection of Public Records Act; in blatant violation of the law.

They will be represented in court by the Modral Law Firm. The Modral Law Firm and the leadership of the APS are one and the same.

The egregiously expensive litigation will be financed by taxpayers. The funds that can be diverted to Modral are apparently unlimited.

The NMIPRA was created for exactly this situation. This is the form of public corruption that the law is supposed to protect us from. This is a test case. It could not be more on point.

Defending the NMIPRA, will be the office of the
New Mexico Attorney General, Gary King.

Opposing the law; in order to hide evidence of public corruption and criminal conspiracy,
the leadership of the APS and Modral.


It would seem that AG King has some formidable opposition.

Also standing against public knowledge of public records,
the Journal and the Trib.

ironicly

Monday, April 23, 2007

Finally, finally some one in APS gets it.

As seen on KRQE; APS has built some new schools on the west side. It is time to draw imaginary lines through neighborhoods, friendships, maybe even families.

It is given: there is no boundry line that will make everyone happy.

The best that stakeholders can hope for is meaningful participation in the decision making process.

APS is apparently doing just that.

They have layed a plan out on the table well in advance of the decision making deadline. They have planned informational meetings. They have gotten news coverage. It all seems very transparent and reasonable.

A tip of the hat to the APS Administrator who is putting this together; the administrator who is modeling the Pillar of Respect; the APS administrator who is leading by their personal example.

If blogger Joe Monahan is right; we're screwed

Joe Monahan writes about the ETHICS OVERLOAD

As for the ethics task force, we already had one so why spend money and time on another? Why not continue to push for the original proposals? The Guv says: " The task force is charged with evaluating options for ethics and campaign finance reform and reviewing the results of the 2007 regular and special legislative sessions." We need 23 folks to give political advice?
He writes without hope for change; and without concern for the ramifications.

The negative impact of a "culture of corruption" in public service cannot be overstated. The financial losses alone are staggering.

List the times that public service has failed to advance the public interests; how many of the list are not the fruit of corruption or incompetence?

There is a direct cure; a wormhole to the center of the problem; transparent accountability.

Transparent accountability is fatal to corruption and incompetence.

It is an instantaneous special session; public service and servants transparently accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct, under a system overwhich they have no control, and even against their will; yes or no.

It could not be more simple.

It could not be more important.

Public corruption and incompetence exist because the system allows them to exist. Otherwise impartial annual audits of public service would be a tradition, not an anomaly.


It is not a question of "how" government can be made transparent. The question is "if" government will be made transparent. After a few hundred years of opportunity; the apparent answer is no. Public servants have determined that among their terms of public service is their right to maintain secrecy around their conduct and competence as public servants.

Ethics reform begins with absolute transparency.

Is there any question that transparent accountability in public service is in the public interest; or that it does not in fact, manifest the public interest?

In so far as legislators continue to refuse to hold themselves honestly accountable for their conduct and competence as public servants; they act against public interests.

On every scale, from school board to the legislature, public servants who do not want do discuss honest accountability to a meaningful standard of conduct; have the unflagging support of the Journal and the Trib.

Sunday, April 22, 2007

Everitt, Maes, and Modral refuse to allow

a (forensic) audit of their public records.

What more proof could one possibly need;
that an audit is absolutely necessary?

resetting the piece

Allegedly; there is public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the administration of the APS Police Department and by extension, in the leadership of the APS.

Evidence: abounds. There is an incontrovertible public record.

The public records consists of "documents" that are essentially public property.
The public has right to inspect and/or copy those documents.
It is against the law for a public entity like the leadership of the APS to willfully obstruct the surrender of public records.
The leadership of the APS currently refuses to surrender the public record of public corruption in the administration of the APS Police Department; in blatant violation of the law.
The leadership of the APS excepts itself from the NMIPRA with the aid and abet of the Modral Law Firm. Taxpayer support of education flows into Modral; and the Modral lawyers defeat the NMIPRA in court by means of unscrupulous litigation.

The Albuquerque Police Department and the Bernalillo County Sheriff's Department are scheduled to endorse a "review" of the APS Police Department. This in blatant disregard for the conflict of interest represented by their participation in an investigation into the conduct of their own departments. Neither will disclose the public record of their departments involvement in the alleged criminal misuse by APS leaders, of computer systems entrusted to law enforcement.

Attorney General Gary King is on top of it

...by his own deliberate choice.

He is so far, alone. So far, he has no public support.
No one else will stand on the record and accept responsibility for the principled resolution of allegations of public corruption in the leadership of the APS.

There are other "people" who should be speaking up on this issue. Among them politicians who have publicly complained about accountability issues in the leadership of the APS; but who are now in hiding on the issues of accountability and the leadership of the APS.

There are content to let someone else do the wet work;
the hand to hand, eyeball to eyeball stuff.

Pete Domenici won't speak up;
nor will Heather Wilson
nor Bill Richardson
nor will Marty Chavez.
nor any city Councilor.
nor Terri Cole and the chamber of commerce.

Nor will any member of the APS Board of Education
nor will any APS senior administrators

nor will Modral

nor will the Journal or the Trib;
( albeit recent hat tips to the Journal for a couple of relatively courageous pokes in the monster's eyes)


There is no defense of an indefensible position except
stonewalling, and conspiring to hide evidence.

incontrovertible evidence of a criminal conspiracy to defeat the intent of the NMIPRA; right under the nose of the New Mexico Attorney General.



How exactly; is this not "news"?

Saturday, April 21, 2007

the Journal continues to push the envelope

Yesterday they wrote; there needs to be open discussion of the gun policy for the APS Police.

Today; there needs to be an open discussion of the very form and existence of an APS Police Department.

Perhaps tomorrow; there needs to be an open discussion of the public records of investigations of allegations of public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the leadership of the APS.


The leadership of the APS will not stand and deliver;
they will not answer simple questions.

They are incompetent or they are corrupt.

Their position is indefensible.
The only defense of an indefensible position is to stonewall.

The Journal has shaken their little wall twice now.
They are poised for a breach.


a tip of the hat to the Journal.

Friday, April 20, 2007

ethics reform task force reforming

Read about it at Heath Haussamen's blog.

"It's time to talk openly about APS...

...gun policy" wrote an editor at the Trib.

I could not agree more.

It is actually way past time to talk openly about APS; and not just gun policy.

It's way past time that we talk openly about a lot of things.

Why can't we talk about site based decision making? Or transparent accountability? Why can't we talk about forensic audits?

Why can't we talk about gun policy?

Because Paula Maes said so. Paula Maes and Modral do not want to revisit the issue. They have prevailed in this and other isses with no more than "Because I said so."

It is "because I said so." that Paula Maes and Modral will not revisit their decision not to require simple truth telling as a matter of policy.

Nor will they revisit their decision not to have transparent accountability to any meaningful standard of conduct.

Nor will they revisit their decision not to provide whistle blower protection to those who expose ethical misconduct.

Nor will they revisit their decision to remove the public forum from the public record, and condone deliberate falsification of the public record.

Nor will they revisit the decision to spend public resources and trust to defeat the NMIPRA and OMA.

Nor will they revist their decision to conceal an honest accounting of the uptown administrative complex.

Nor will they revisit their decision to suppress the truth of public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the administration of the APS Police Force; and in general.

Nor will they revisit their decision to keep all audit results "confidential"; releasing only what they want to release; enforcing that privilege by means of the Modral Law Firm and taxpayer support for "education".

Nor will they revisit their decision to refuse forensic audits of public resources in the APS.

Nor will they revisit their decision to abdicate as role models for the student standard of conduct.

  • They are no longer, themselves, accountable to the same "minimum" standard of conduct to which they hold students accountable.
  • They only stonewall in response to the question; Will you hold yourself honestly accountable to the student standard of conduct.
  • They removed from their code of conduct the expectation and the phrase; in no case shall the standard for adults be lower than the standard for students.

All of these situations exist to the benefit of Maes/Modral. I challenge anyone to find another board member, except Robert Lucero, who will stand on the record in support of any of these decisions.

Demigods on the board; like Paula Maes, have usurped control over public power and resources in the APS. She acts as though she can do what ever she wants. It is she who will decide what gets discussed, and what does not.

"Some of the old ones seem to have all of the clout." said a man who would like to talk about whether or not he should remain defenseless in his assignment to protect 98,000 of our sons and daughters.

Paula Maes and the Modral Law firm are "the old one".

This is not the way a school board should function. It is not in the public best interest. It is not in the best interests of students.

Paula Maes and the Modral Law Firm have no right to usurp the public agenda.



And the Journal and the Trib have every obligation to expose them.

How do you get the Journal and the Trib to investigate and report upon allegations of public corruption and criminial conspiracy in the leadership of the public schools?

Everitt's support is eroding

An editorial in the Journal yesterday; revealed all of the pertinent information;

Everitt has taken too long to complete her investigation of Gil Lovato and the APS Police Department Administration.

It has taken so long; that is now reasonable to agree that she is simply hiding the results of the investigations.

Why hide the results? It certainly isn't to protect Gil Lovato. It is to protect all of those who had oversight responsibilities which were ignored; Everitt, Savage, others. They have to explain why public corruption and criminal conspiracies were allowed on their watch.

They can't of course; and that is why they continue to suppress the truth.

Beth Everitt enjoys the support of no one. Even the Journal has conceded that the delay is tantamount to proof of her personal corruption and/or incompetence.

The school board has oversight responsibility over Everitt. It cannot be forgotten that their tacit approval of the cover up, enables it. At some point it will be proven that they approved spending educational funding to pay lawyers to defeat the NMIPRA; in order to protect Everitt and themselves from accountability to the law.

I look to the Journal to hold them to account as well.

In the meantime, a tip of the hat to the Journal editors for exposing Everitts incompetence and/or corruption in the investigation of public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the leadership of the APS.

Thursday, April 19, 2007

To: Custodian of Public Records, Albuquerque Public Schools

From: Charles MacQuigg, (address and phone number on record)

This constitutes a request for all documents, papers, letters, books, maps, tapes, photographs, recordings and other materials, regardless of physical form or characteristics, that are used, created, received, maintained or held by or on behalf of any APS and relate to public business, whether or not the records are required by law to be created or maintained and excluding any records whose request is prohibited by any agreement between myself and APS.


The Attorney General of the State of New Mexico, Gary King has indicated an interest in the following public records regarding my complaint against you.

“… I still need a little more specific information to be able to pursue the IPRA issue. Not so much who, but when. For instance, if you sent a letter to the agency requesting documents, we need a copy of the request letter and any response you received…”
Gary King
Therefore, I am making a request for a package of public records be prepared for the Attorney General, to include the following.
  1. All public records of complaints filed against Gil Lovato, with APS' Equal Opportunity Office;
  2. the findings of investigations of those complaints;
  3. and of the dissemination of those findings and results.
  4. Including but not limited to the "ongoing" investigations by other entities than the EOSO.
  5. All requests for public records related to Gil Lovato.
  6. All responses to those requests.
  7. All records of public resources that have been committed to litigating against requests for public records under the auspices of the NMIPRA.
  8. All statements made by, or on the behalf of Elizabeth Everitt; or the APS, or the Modral Law firm regarding the District’s intention to release the results of investigations of public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the administration of the APS Police.
  9. Records of APS administrators who have attended NMIPRA training by the AG’s Office or any other.
Please send your response directly to the Attorney General, flagged for his personal attention. Copy to me; all of your responses to him.

As the custodian of public records, if you would please, acknowledge that you have received this request and that it meets your needs.

Ched MacQuigg

cc. New Mexico State Attorney General Gary King

the outside investigator knows if Lovato is guilty of anything

and Beth Everitt and Paula Maes/Modral want him to keep his mouth shut; or they will sue him.

the difference between a "review" and a forensic audit of the APS Police Department

is that after a "review", the truth will still be secret,
and nobody gets arrested.

The upcoming "review" of the APS Police Department

is being legitimized by the names and reputations of Albuquerque Police Chief Ray Schultz and Bernalillo County Sheriff Darren White.

Part of the alleged corruption that compelled this "review" was the illegal use of law enforcement computers (at the APD and/or the BCSO) by the leadership of the APS.

It appears that the leadership of the APS has managed to have themselves "reviewed" by co-conspirators; co-conspirators and the fectless Council of Great City Schools.

That it why it is important for Ray Schultz and Darren White to address the appearance of impropriety with a sworn statement of the truth of the illegal use of computers overwhich they have responsibility; by the leadership of the APS.

And at their earliest opportunity.

Yada Yada Discipline in the leadership of the APS

The leadership of the APS cannot prove by its record that it is honestly accountable to any standard of conduct at all; even the law.

If they could, they would.

to his continuing credit, NMAG Gary King

continues to remain engaged on the record. Only someone who has tried to get a someone to stand on the record recognizing complaints of criminal misconduct in the leadership of the APS; can truly appreciate how extraordinary is Mr. King's political and personal courage.

I have been adding items to those who's solution require his attention; and this was AG King's response;

I have also forwarded this to the appropriate part of my agency. Thanks for the information. By the way, I still need a little more specific information to be able to pursue the IPRA issue. Not so much who, but when. For instance, if you sent a letter to the agency requesting documents, we need a copy of the request letter and any response you received. We also need contact information for you so my agency can ask any follow up questions. Even though we try to be electronically capable, we are not currently set up to initiate the request from the posting on your blog. Perhaps you have already sent hard copies of your request to the agency. If you have not, we need a letter or fax or potentially an email request that contains the requisite information to open a file.
Gary King

Again, an entirely reasonable and professional response, extraordinary in the fact that it is on the record.

I heard Gary King "debate" his opponent on KKOB before the election. He was answering unfiltered questions from the radio audience. That is extraordinarily courageous: especially in contrast with the leadership of the APS who will not answer questions at all.

Yada Yada Discipline in the APS

John Rosemond is a syndicated columnist in the Journal.

As you may imagine, he and I are kindred spirits when it comes to discipline and kids.

The problem with (student) discipline in the APS,
Yada Yada Discipline, is manifest in APS' official statement on the vandalism at the aquarium, the assurance that the students face possible discipline at school.

This ambivalent approach reflects the fact that,
APS has no discipline philosophy.

Other than allowing site based administrators to do what ever makes the least waves; and then backing their play.

If these students face disciplinary actions at their school, and their parents object in the least (in particular if they threaten to sue), the possible discipline at school will be abandoned; and the administration will roll over on its back and begin pissing itself.

(My apology to the administration and staff at John Adams Middle School; I assume that their Principal is like most all that I have met before. I will bow to controverting facts.)

Wednesday, April 18, 2007

In response to questions that have been raised

Whether or not the allegations that have been made against Gil Lovato are true.

The question has been answered. It was answered in the results of the investigations that were done; one by an external and impartial, private investigator; the other done by APS internally.

If you could see the results, you would know that the allegations were proven true by a preponderance of sworn testimony and evidence; or not. The case is solved. The only thing you don't know; is any part of the truth.

The results of both investigations are public records. The phrase public record means something very specific and important. In particular, it is important because if it is a public record, you have the right to inspect and or copy it.

The law provides specific exceptions; you can't ask for medical records, or letters of reference, or a very few other kinds of records. Everything that is not excepted specifically and expressly; is not excepted.

Beth Everitt says these are "confidential records" and therefore excepted from the NMIPRA.

What do you think? Do the results of these two investigations fit this exception for confidential records? ... from the Attorney General's commentary on this part of the law.

The Confidential Materials Act (codified at NMSA 1978, §§ 14-3A-1 to -2) permits any library, college, university, museum or institution of the state or any of its political subdivisions to keep confidential materials of historical or educational value on which the donor or seller has imposed restrictions on access for a specified period. The statutory protection does not apply if the documents donated or sold were public records as defined by the Inspection of Public Records Act while in the possession of the donor or seller at the time of the sale.
Beth Everitt says these are "personnel" records. They are not personnel records by any reasonable interpretation of the word. Beth Everitt is lying. But just for the heck of it; assume that they are personnel records;

OK; so what? There is no exception in the NMIPRA for "personnel" records.

Beth Everitt has an exception to the NMIPRA only in so far as it is provided for her, by expensive lawyers on the public's dime.

There are only two possibilities: the papers in the boxes prove that Gil Lovato is guilty of something; or they don't.

If the records prove guilt; Everitt has a responsibility to hold Lovato accountable for his misconduct. Although she is on record as saying even if there is criminal misconduct; she hasn't decided whether or not to turn it over to the DA.

If the records prove innocence; Everitt has a responsibility to clear Lovato's name.

Yet her decision is to deliberately violate the law to suppress the truth; even litigating against the NMIPRA to keep the records secret. She is deliberately breaking the law and using public resources to escape accountability.

There is only one reason to hide the truth.

What reason would APS have not hold Lovato accountable for mishandling money?

The leadership of the APS cannot afford to fight Lovato in court. He has body maps to barter with. APS will get its ass handed to it if the truth comes out. So Lovato's maps are only worth money if he can threaten to spill them out on the floor of a courtroom. The bummer for Lovato is that there is no way that APS can give him any money right now.

The big looser here is Lovato; he isn't even going to get money for Bregman's bill. Unless they actually intend to sue taxpayers because the leadership of the aps didn't fire Lovato. Juris Mustelidae; great work if you can get it.

So who is going to get to see the truth beside the leadership of the APS? Will Ray Schultz and Darren White see the truth; the truth being that one, the other, or both of their departments allowed their computers to be used illegally by the leadership of the APS; allegedly.

Will the DA see the truth?

Will the NM Attorney General see the truth?

Who holds the leadership of the APS accountable for public corruption and criminal conspiracy?

To be voted upon; tonight

This is a link to the subject of a vote by the board, tonight.

It has to do with a grant of $100,000 from the city to APS. So far as I can tell, the purpose of the grant is to offset APS' costs for fingerprinting and backgound checking volunteers.

Of the $100,000; $40,100 goes to audit fee ($100) and $40K to "other contract services". Of the remaining $59K, $59K will be spent on "other charges and indirect costs"

I really began to worry when I read that inorder for APS to manage this grant, they would need more office space and someone to "coordinate". Knowing that none of the great unwashed can "coordinate"; it must mean that they are going to hire another administrator. At a cost of roughly two thirds of the grant. This is all surmise. Beth Everitt's idea of transparent accountability does not include candid, forthright and honest disclosure of the spending of public resources. I will bow to controverting evidence.


All of which begs the question, why doesn't the Bernalillo County Sheriff handle all of the fingerprinting and background checks? If Beth Everitt has some kind of relationship with the BCSO that allows the use of the sheriff's computer to check out an administrator's girlfriend's background; surely it is available to check out the background of a parent volunteer.

You never know; someone might want to sneak in and steal another mariachi band.

Police Officers in the APS Police Department

are legitimate police officers. I have made no complaint except against very certain ones in their ranks.

The police force however is another matter. It is not accredited or certified by anyone except the leadership of the APS. And therefore, allegedly, its administration is racked with corruption and incompetence. The truth is being hidden. Public records are being hidden.

What happens when one of our guys has to shoot someone and it comes out that the leadership of the APS never bothered to have their publicly funded, private police force, accredited or certificated?

Do you suppose we might get sued?

Do you think Maes/Modral will still make a bundle defending us?

It is time for Sheriff Darren White

to admit or deny that computers in his office were used by the leadership of the APS to do illegal background checks.

There exist, public records of the truth. They are being suppressed by Beth Everitt who claims that they are "personnel" records and "confidential" and exempt from the NMIPRA.

They are not "personnel" records. Even if they were; the NMIPRA provides no exception for "personnel" records.

It is an indefensible premise; except by spending public funds to hire unscrupulous lawyers to provide their personal exception to the NMIPRA.

The public has a right to know the truth of the fate of their trust and treasure.

Lest Tom Savage's Demotion go completely unnoticed.

Tom Savage is paid approximately $120,000 a year, $10,000 a month, $2,500 a week, $5oo dollars a day for his competence and conduct as a public servant.

It was his job, at least on paper, to make sure that the APS Police Department didn't deteriorate into a praetorian guard with a rogue commander.

It would have been his responsibility to insure that the department was accredited or certificated in some manner so as to ensure competence and propriety.

Apparently he has failed in that respect, and Beth Everitt has relieved him of his command over the APS Police Department.

A recent audit of the administration of the APS revealed that evaluations were subjective and unrelated to promotions or step placement.

Administrators are not placed in positions of power and resposibility by virtue of any objective measurement of their competence in that position. It's a good ole boy system that relatively recently started letting girls play too.

Tom Savage is a good ole boy who knows how to keep his mouth shut. One of the very first things he did to protect the leadership from the breaking scandal in the police department, was to order all APS employees to keep their mouths shut about what was going on.

He is the administrator who argued that you can't tell the real truth about what is going on in schools because it would piss off realtors who sold houses in those schools neighborhoods.

He is the Central Office administrator that Wayne Knight when to for help with his unethical interference in my curriculum.

He is among APS administrators who will not accept honest accountability to any meaningful standard of conduct.

Were he; he would have more to say than, "no comment".

Beth Everitt has both the opportunity and the obligation

to comment on a matter of concern at the board meeting tonight.

She will or will not make one of the following statements:

  • I am aware of allegations of public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the leadership of the Albuquerque Public Schools. I accept the need for a forensic audit of the leadership of the APS and the Modral Law Firm.
  • There is no need of any kind of audit of the leadership of the APS; I will stake my reputation on that belief.
  • There will be no audit. Not now; not ever.
  • Because I said so.
Or she will continue to stonewall; an especially cowardly way to say, ...because I said so.

The Journal and the Trib will or will not allow, Susie Gran and Amy Miller to tell the truth about what happens.

APS Board members have both the opportunity and the obligation

to comment on a matter of concern at the board meeting tonight.

They will or will not make one of the following statements:

  • I am aware of allegations of public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the leadership of the Albuquerque Public Schools. I accept the need for a forensic audit of the leadership of the APS and the Modral Law Firm.
  • There is no need of any kind of audit of the leadership of the APS; I will stake my reputation on that belief.
  • There will be no audit. Not now; not ever.
  • Because I said so.
Or they will continue to stonewall; an especially cowardly way to say, ...because I said so.

Their names are; Marty Esquivel, Gordon Rowe,
Mary Lee Martin, Delores Griego, Berna Facio,
Robert Lucero, and Paula Mae
s.

The Journal and the Trib will or will not allow, Susie Gran and Amy Miller to tell the truth about what happens.

Gary King, NM Attorney General

has offered a ray of hope.

He chose to acknowledge on the record that, there are allegations of public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the leadership of the APS.

He is in rare company.

The absolute truth is that he is standing alone.

Bill Richardson will not.

Marty Chavez will not.

Darren White will not.

Ray Schultz will not.

Terri Cole will not.

Pete Domenici will not.

Heather Wilson will not.

The guy who is the absolute father of Character Counts, Michael Josephson will not.

No APS Board member will.

No Senior APS Administrator will.

No one will make the following statement on the record:

I am aware of allegations of public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the leadership of the Albuquerque Public Schools. I believe that there needs to be a forensic audit of public resources and interests.
Neither has anyone stood on the record and said:
There is no need of any kind of audit of the leadership of the APS; I will stake my reputation on that belief.


But Gary King did.

He walked his talk.

Tip of the hat to New Mexico Attorney General Gary King for standing in support of his beliefs.

brickbats to the Journal and the Trib; standing in support of the cover up of public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the leadership of the APS; and against an immediate forensic audit of the leadership of the APS.

There is an elephant in the room
He faces away from you
his tail draped accross your head
front to back.

If you cannot see it
can't you at least smell it?

Tuesday, April 17, 2007

KRQE continues to lead in indepth APS coverage

KRQE

Beth Everitt cannot be believed

According to news releases; Beth Everitt is canning Gil Lovato; "Because of the seriousness of the allegations regarding the Albuquerque Public Schools Police.

The truth is that you can't fire someone over allegations
no matter how serious you think that they are.

You can only fire someone if your investigations prove
that the allegations were not only serious; but true.

Beth Everitt is "firing" Lovato over just cause; and she is doing everything she can to keep the cause from public knowledge.

Everitt said she has "not decided if the Lovato investigation will be turned over to the district attorney for possible criminal charges".

It is not your "decision", Ms. Everitt; it is your obligation. If there was (probably) criminal misconduct; it is the District Attorney's decision; not yours, whether or not the commander of your praetorian guard will be prosecuted for it.

This is why the records, all of them, must be released. It is why they are not being released.

Everritt is not being candid, forthright, and honest with stakeholders.

neither is the Journal, nor the Trib.

How did your representative on the aps school board vote?

A decision has been made. It affects anyone who considers themselves a stakeholder in the Albuquerque Public Schools.

A request was been made for the records of the investigations into public corruption in the APS Police Department.

A decision has been made to obstruct that request by seeking escape from accountability to the New Mexico Inspection of Public Records Act; by using public funding for education instead to fill the coffers of Modral; who then defeats the NMIPRA through onerous and ethically indefensibly lucrative litigation.

A decision has been made to use public money to protect public corruption from being exposed.

This represents my request for information from my representative on the school board, Mr. Marty Esquivel.

Sir,

How did you vote on the decision to use taxpayer support for education to pay Maes/Modral to protect Gil Lovato's public record from public knowledge?

The courtesty of a prompt, honest and unequivocal response would be appreciated.

Your constituent,

ched macquigg