APS vs BCSO; "shoot out at the OK Corral"

At 3 hours and 2 minutes into the board meeting, link, you can hear what open government lawyer and hero of transparency Marty Esquivel said; beginning with his reference to the famous gunfight, wikilink, and the need for everyone to keep their mouths shut.

Kathy Korte had just said she wanted some legal advice from their attorney Modrall lawyer Art Melendres, on APS' options with regard to commissioning its police officers.

Before Melendres could open his mouth, Esquivel cautioned the board about asking Melendres any questions in a public forum, the answers to which they might now or later, want to keep secret from APS stake and interest holders, and the courts. Esquivel believes that as long as the law allows him/them to hide the truth, it is then alright to hide the truth. In particular, if hiding the truth serves their interests in any litigation.

Melendres then told the board, his strong preference would be to furnish the board with the truth in a "confidential opinion".

That the law allows them to do this is self evident. They would rather that you believe the law requires them to.

The standard of conduct they hold up for students reads;

People of character are oft required to do less than the law allows and more than the law requires.

The student standards are higher standards of conduct than the law; the lowest acceptable standard of conduct.

The question is not; how can they hide the truth (the law allows it), but rather, why do they need to? They can't hide the truth from the public except in the public interests. How are public interests served by denying them the benefit of a legal opinion prepared at their expense?

Politicians and public servants are allowed by the law to keep certain truths secret from public knowledge. They are allowed to do this for good and ethical reasons.

There are no good and ethical reasons to hide the truth about the commissioning of APS police officers. If there were, they would point to them. They would point to the need to keep the truth hidden and defend it. There aren't, they can't, they won't.

The law allows them to keep the truth "confidential"; the law doesn't require them to.

For some reason they will not disclose, the leadership of the APS needs to hide the truth about what their options are in gaining commissions for their Praetorian Guard.

They are using the same dodge to hide the Caswell Report on felony criminal misconduct by APS senior administrators and the subsequent cover up. The Caswell Report is a public record, politicians and public servants commissioned the investigation within their public service and used public money (classroom dollars) to underwrite it.

The board's lawyer claims, because their lawyers hired the PI, the investigator's report is "work product" covered by attorney client privilege, and therefore excepted from public inspection and knowledge. It's bullshit of course, but they have provided for themselves an unlimited budget for litigation and a shameless and utterly unabashed record of its use. Their bullshit will float for however long they need it to; to the Supreme Court if they feel like it; cost is no object.

The law does not require them to hide the report that names the names of APS senior administrators who committed felonies, it allows them to.

The question still; why do they need to?

Marty Esquivel suggested that a public servant, a charter school principal, was a coward for not standing in a public meeting and responding to legitimate questions about the public interests and her public service. He said, "it says a lot" about her character.

His own unwillingness to respond to legitimate questions about the public interests and his public service, says precisely the same thing about his character and courage.

Ask Esquivel why (not how) they are hiding the Caswell Report, and you will find his advocacy for the need for politicians and public servants to stand and deliver, doesn't apply to him. Just as the prohibition of personal attacks (like calling someone a coward for not being honest) at board meetings; doesn't apply to him. Just like the board policy prohibiting individual board members from creating unlawful restraining orders doesn't apply to him. Just like of prohibition of giving unlawful orders to the APS Police Department, his Praetorian Guard, doesn't apply to him.

Blame the Journal and the rest of the establishment media for his continued success.




photos Mark Bralley