Wednesday, March 16, 2011

Brooks acknowledges receipt of complaint

I have filed a complaint against
APS Executive Director of
Communications Monica Armenta.
I have filed the complaint with
her boss, APS Supt Winston Brooks.

Brooks acknowledgment of his
receipt of the complaint is noteworthy.

He has responded by means of "return receipt"; a dialogue box that opens on the respondent's screen and asks if they would acknowledge having received the email.

APS Executive Director of Communications Rigo Chavez never uses the feature. He says; "it's not my practice."

Armenta says there is no Departmental Policy with regard to extending the simple courtesy of acknowledging receipt of the email. She is hit or miss herself; sometimes extending the courtesy, sometimes not.

Winston Brooks is more miss than hit when it comes to acknowledging complaints.

But on this occasion he has.

He has acknowledged that he has received my complaint against Armenta.

It took a certain amount of character and courage to acknowledge receipt. Because in so doing, he acknowledged also his obligation to respond; to give the complaint due process.

Giving the complaint due process will require character and courage heretofore unseen in the leadership of the APS. They have never been able to summon the character and the courage to hold themselves honestly accountable any meaningful standards of conduct and competence, much less to the same standards of conduct they establish and enforce upon student; the Pillars of Character Counts!

The complaint, the receipt of which, he acknowledged;

Supt Brooks,

I write to you to file a complaint against the Communications Department in general, and Monica Armenta in particular.

I have asked four legitimate questions;

1. Why have hundreds of APS whistle blower complaints been denied the final hearing promised in school board policy?

2. Why was the APS Role Modeling clause (In no case shall the standards of conduct for an adult be lower than the standards of conduct for students.) removed from the adult code of conduct? Why will it not be restored? Why won’t the school board discuss the issue openly and honestly and in public?

3. What is in the Caswell Report (APSPD circa 2007)? Does it point to evidence of the felony criminal misconduct of senior APS administrators? Why has the evidence been withheld from the District Attorney for more than four years? Why are operational funds (otherwise classroom bound dollars) being spent to litigate against the surrender of an ethically redacted version to public knowledge?

4. Why does the leadership of the APS oppose an independent audit of administrative and executive effectiveness and efficiency, standards and accountability, the ethically redacted results of which, would be surrendered to the public record?

Ms Armenta has failed to respond candidly, forthrightly and honestly to the questions. She is apparently claiming to be "too busy" to respond to follow up questions.

I am wondering if you would be willing to step up and either answer the questions, candidly, forthrightly and honestly yourself, refer me to anyone who will, or order Ms Armenta or one of her subordinates to respond to legitimate questions about the public interests in the APS.

Additionally, Ms Armenta implied in response to question number 2, that she has no obligation to answer for the board. Are you in agreement that her responsibilities do not include communicating for the board, only for the administration, in which case I am curious how the Admin's website contains so much communication on behalf of the board.

I really think it is time for someone in the leadership of the APS to summon the character and the courage to tell the truth about the public interests and public service in the APS. This ongoing game playing and fundamental lack of honesty and accountability is really wearing quite thin,

Grateful for your time and attention

Charles MacQuigg
It has been a week since the complaint was filed.

photos Mark Bralley

No comments: