Whatever it is, that is going on,"it", is of legitimate interest to stakeholders. There are legitimate questions about the public interests. There are legitimate questions about standards and accountability in the leadership of the APS.
The ethically redacted version of the truth could have,
and should have been posted immediately.
Why in the world do we allow those with the most to hide
to redact the public record of their public service?
If we are to hold APS Supt Winston Brooks accountable for his conduct and his competence, it will be in the next school board election. It is our next and only real opportunity to exercise control our power and resources in the administration of the APS.
Have Robert Lucero, Marty Esquivel, and Delores Griego provided the oversight the people deserve? How do we know if they have done their job, if we don't know if Brooks has done his?
How are we to know the truth, if Winston Brooks is allowed to redact his own public record
... with no oversight at all?
photo Mark Bralley
Monday, November 15, 2010
Brooks handling of the Etheridge thing
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
The comments around our middle school today is that is that many teachers are of the opinion that Ruby did not back down from a position in which she knew she was right, and therefore received the contempt of Brooks.
Once more "Charlie Brown" Brooks inspires animosity and distrust among those who work under him.
What a rube!
Post a Comment