Esquivel assures editors - it's all "legal"; editors swallow it, hook, line and sinker.

In the Journal this morning, link, a Journal editorial entitled;

APS Board can’t pretend lawyer’s report doesn’t exist

The headline flies in the face of the reality; they most assuredly can pretend it doesn't exist, they are pretending it doesn't exist and they will continue to pretend it doesn't exist for as long as it suits them.
 
The editors continue to insist;

(the APS Board) really can’t continue to act like the report does not exist.

despite the fact that they can do whatever they want.  They can do whatever unlimited budgets and legal weaselry and only infrequent actual accountability to the lowest standards of conduct allows them to do.

Consider for example that after 7 years, they are still pretending there wasn't felony criminal misconduct involving senior APS administrators in leadership of their publicly funded private police force.  They can pretend, they do pretend, they will pretend; whatever they want, for as long as they want.

The editors express their worry that their willing ignorance might "set the district up for serious legal liability."  What do the editors really care about the district's legal liabilities? Whatever their concern, it is yet to manifest itself actually investigating and reporting upon the district's legal liabilities.

Consider Journal coverage of Journal Managing Editor Kent Walz' friend School Board Member and Defendant Marty Esquivel, as he spends 20 teacher salaries on his cost is no object defense of his ego.

Where is Journal editorial concern over that liability?

Journal readers haven't the foggiest idea how much money these people are spending in settling complaints against administrators and school board members - settlements that contain no admission of guilt.  Tax dollars are being traded for clean records.

Journal readers haven't the slightest idea of their liability for cost is no object litigation in the interests of politicians and public servants trying to litigate their way out of the consequences of their misconduct.

The editors gave Esquivel an opportunity to argue that;

the  (school board) president does have the authority to hire an attorney as long as the cost is less than $50,000.

Esquivel is yet to point the supposed support of his conjecture in law or school board policy.  If it's written down somewhere, why can't he cite it?

Citation or no, the editors are on board with the idea that there is the authority somewhere, for a school board president to spend an entire teacher salary equivalent, without oversight.  It other times and places, that argument would be explored under a headline like; these people cannot be serious!

For a third time in their editorial, the editors insist;

"As the superintendent’s employers, the board can’t just pretend the report doesn’t exist"

If there are problems brought to light in the report, saying you didn’t read it would be a lousy defense if an APS employee were to file a lawsuit.

In truth, (willful) ignorance isn't a lousy defense at all.  Given enough lawyers, guns and money, any defense can be made to work.

One wonders, do the editors get out much?

The APS School Board remains willfully ignorant of the cover up of the cover up of felony public corruption in the leadership their police force.  What has that willful ignorance cost them; nothing.  They haven't even gotten their names in the paper.  What has it cost taxpayers, still to be determined.

When the editors argue;

"Maestas did the right thing by bringing in a qualified professional from outside the district to do the investigation"

they give Esquivel and the board members who believe school board presidents can spend $50K at a whack without school board approval/oversight, a pass on conduct that may be "legal" but is otherwise, just plain unacceptable.




photo Mark Bralley