Citizens Advisory Council on Communication

More than one hundred citizens have signed and submitted a petition to the leadership of the APS. Those citizens feel that communications with APS can be improved, and
have proposed an eminently workable plan to do just that.

The plan begins with an open and honest discussion of the expectations of citizens, politicians and public servants, with regard to transparency in the spending of public power and resources.

The petition and plan were hand delivered to the school board by Rep Janice Arnold-Jones, during a public forum in August, 2011.

The petition is being denied due process. Whatever else “due process” includes, it includes at the very least; public discussion and a roll call vote on a legitimate petition.

Citizens who have

• assembled peacefully, and exercised their Constitutionally protected human rights to
• speak freely and
• petition their government,

are being ignored.

How can the Constitution protect citizen's right to petition the government without creating a corresponding obligation on the part of government to respond in good faith to the petitions they receive?

Never mind, for the moment, the Constitutional violations;
consider the violations of their own code of conduct they create
by their denial of due process to the petition.

Their code of ethics, link, reads in significant part;

Establish an open, two-way communication process
with students, staff, families and all segments of the
community.

How does obstructing the efforts of the Citizens Advisory Council on Communication, establish open, two-way communication?

And,

Make the education and well-being of students
the basis for all decision making.

How does denying due process for the CACoC petition contribute positively to the education and well-being of students?

The denial of due process for the CACoC contributes only to the well-being of people who are trying to avoid having to sit down somewhere and respond candidly, forthrightly and honestly, to legitimate questions about the public interests and about their public service.

And,

Accept responsibility and accountability for one’s own
actions and behaviors.

There are board members and senior administrators who have not accepted responsibility and accountability for their actions and behaviors. The violation of their own code of conduct is as blatant as it is egregious.

And finally,

Avoid conflicts of interest or the appearance thereof
and refrain from using the board position for personal
... gain.

There is personal gain in their decision to withhold due process,
for every board member and senior administrator who is
unwilling to be held honestly accountable to meaningful
standards of conduct and competence within their public service;

... a subject that just might come up if open and honest communication between the leadership fo the APS and the community members they serve, ever gets underway for real.