Friday, April 04, 2008

I went to the "special meeting" of the Board of Education this morning.

I had intended to voice my concern that they were about to
take action on a contract with Winston Brooks;
and that there were aspects of the contract
that would be unacceptable to stakeholders.

I suspect that the contract does not mention
Winston Brooks' obligation as a role model
of the student standard of conduct.

It is unacceptable for the Superintendent of the APS
to simply pretend no honest obligation as a role model.


I suspect that there is no mention creating meaningful standards of conduct and competence for public servants in the APS. Nor is there mention of his proving that intention by beginning an immediate impartial administrative accountability audit.

More importantly, his second year of employment is not
contingent on the administration of the APS passing its
second annual audit.

There is no reason to oppose an honest accountability audit
except to escape one.

Accountability to fatal to corruption and incompetence.

You cannot end the good ol' boy system except by ending
the good ol' boys.

That will happen over the vigorous resistance of
good ol' boys like Tom Savage,

and the most expensive litigation taxpayers can afford.

Is Winston Brooks charged with cleaning out the good
ol' boys club and Modrall?

Winston Brook's
contract language is secret.
Stakeholders had no opportunity to read it before it was signed.*
It was written in a meeting that stakeholders were not allowed to attend. It was signed off on in a "special meeting" where public input was not allowed.

*My email to Marty Esquivel, asking for the draft language
on role modeling, and standards and accountability,
sent at around eight in the morning Thursday,
is yet to be answered.


Anonymous said...

Well, after witnessing Paula's support of Marty at Wednesday's board meeting.....

Methinks Marty has crossed over to the Dark Side. I will not vote for him again.

Anonymous said...

how can a public servant's contract not be public information. Isn't that illegal unto itself?

ched macquigg said...

It is public information, and it will show up eventually; just not in time for stakeholders to evaluate it before it was signed on their behalf.