Why is it up to me?

If you listen to KRQE's coverage of the highest bidder
phone deal;
you will not be satisfied by APS' John Dufay's explanation.

You would probably feel better if some impartial person
who knew about phone systems, and business management
policies and procedures, and about ethics;

looked at the deal.

The lowest bidder received 31 of 50 possible points that
could be given based on whether or not their bid was the lowest.

There is the appearance of a conflict of interest;
Monica Armenta's mother's annual income, v the best
interests of tax payers and other stakeholders.

Creating the appearance of a conflict of interest,
is expressly forbidden by the APS School Board's own code
of conduct.

Although board members themselves readily admit that
the code of ethics that they adopted for themselves;

does not require them to act ethically in the public interest.

It does not reference the concept of ethical behavior
anywhere but in its title.

By their own free admission it is; completely unenforceable.

The leadership of the APS cannot run the investigation of itself.
It not only creates the appearance of a conflict of interest;
it is absolutely a conflict of interest.

Every independent audit of the leadership of the APS has revealed significant problems.

Every audit.the audit of the M&O scandal revealed up to a million dollars lost to taxpayers and an evaluation system for administrators that was "... subjective and unrelated to promotion or step placement.

John Duffay never had to demonstrate objectively, that
he has the skill set to let million dollar phone contracts.

He was promoted to his current position by an organizational system that is accurately and honestly characterized as a "good ol' boy system". He was promoted by good ol' boys because he is a good ol' boy.

APS can offer no proof to taxpayers, that there has been a single policy or procedural change that addresses the specific complaint by Council of the Great City Schools Auditors.

A subsequent audit revealed that the administration of the APS revolved around "... a culture of fear of retribution and retaliation ..." (emphasis added)

Since then, the school board has deliberately denied whistle blower protection to those who expose ethical misconduct;

conduct like letting a contract with your crony's mother's phone company, without candid, forthright and honest public exposure of the obvious conflict of interest.

The latest audit, the Meyner's Audit, revealed that "senior APS administrators let contracts in excess of $50,000 "without involving purchasing."

The name(s) of those senior administrators are a secret.

The leadership of the APS knows who they are,
but they won't tell you.

Was this a contract that was let
"... without involving purchasing", and
accountable to policies and procedures that the
Meyners Auditors wrote were "financially unsound".

Did John Duffay let a contract that was not made in the public best interests?


You will never know. You will never, ever know.

Unless you demand an immediate full scale forensic audit of the entire APS.

And unless you take your demand, and more than a few of your friends and colleagues and neighbors, to the public forum of a school board meeting to make that demand.

Torches and pitchforks!

There is no alternative gesture.


Paula Maes says you will not audit her conduct and competence as a public servant. Furthermore, she says, neither will you audit any of her cronies.

She, and her husband's law firm Modrall, can do whatever they want. They have a large bore pipeline to unwitting taxpayer support for education; money is no object. Neither are ethics.

They can spend as much money as they want;
without telling you how much they are spending,
or on what they are spending it. It is a secret.


She says no audit.

What say you?

You can't leave this up to me.