the CoGCS review, in other words

What the Council of Great City Schools wrote;

"Based on their past performance, it is not apparent that the Board of Education and the district's executive leadership team would provide the executive leadership , support and backing, and make critical and difficult decisions that would be required to create a safety, security and professional , fully authorized law enforcement department."

What they meant;

Based on her record, it is not apparent that Beth Everitt can provide the administrative leadership, support, and critical decision making ability to create a full fledged law enforcement department.

Based on their record, it is not apparent that the Albuquerque Public Schools Board of Education can provide the executive leadership, support, and critical decision making ability to create a full fledged law enforcement department.

Why they wrote what they wrote;

Beth Everitt found herself with a public scandal in the leadership of her police department. Her response was to wait too long to begin an impartial investigation of the public corruption and incompetenc; and then to hide results of the investigation from stakeholders. She decided to keep them "confidential"; even in violation of the law.

And that, in the eyes of the Council of Great City Schools, is a record of an apparent lack of administrative leadership.

Why they wrote what the wrote;

The School Board has a Superintendent who is hiding the public record of felony criminal misconduct in the leadership of the APS. They have a Superintendent that intends to spend public money to pay the lawyers of the Modral law firm, to defeat the requirements of the Inspection of Public Records Act.

They will not talk about it on the record.

And that, in the eyes of the Council of Great City Schools, is a record of an apparent lack of executive leadership.

If a full fledged police force is determined to be the best option for keeping students and schools safe; the leadership of the APS is, by their own record, apparently incapable of providing the critically necessary effective leadership and oversight.

It is apparent that those conclusions of the CoGCS investigators are to be ignored; all of the options that include the supervision of a professional police force are still on the table. They will remain on the table despite the fact that the CoGCS investigators concluded that a professional police force cannot be administered or lead by the current leadership.

They are just going to pretend that the elephant in the room, isn't in the room.

Are we supposed to pretend that there are not systemic and institutional flaws yet to be addressed, yet to be admitted; that are interfering with the ability to protect 6,000 teachers and 89,000 of our sons and daughters?


Are these folks role models, or are they not? If they are role models; then they should be accountable to the standard of conduct that they are modeling. What standard of conduct allows you simply except yourself from the consequences of your misconduct and pretend that nothing is wrong.


All that the leadership of the APS is modeling before students is hypocrisy, dishonesty, and contempt for accountability; even to the standard of conduct to which they hold students accountable.