The interim APS Superintendent - can s/he become the permanent superintendent?

There is now in the APS, an acting superintendent.  There will be by Friday, an interim superintendent.  There will be in several months up to a year, a duly hired superintendent.

A question has arisen; can the interim superintendent become the actual superintendent?

There are reasonable arguments on both sides.  Why not hire the best person for both jobs and if they turn out to be the same person, so what.

The "so what" is the creation of an appearance of impropriety.
What if the current board picks an interim superintendent willing to continue the cover up, and then cements that person's chances of being picked by the new school board?

The interim superintendency should be a fact finding.

What stakeholders need in an interim superintendent, is someone to lead a complete examination and review of the administration of the APS in preparation for its repair and rejuvenation.

Someone who will tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the ethically redacted truth about incompetency, corruption, and the practices that enable them, in the leadership of the APS.

The new school board and the superintendent they select
should know what they're getting.  The people should know what they've gotten into.

The people have a need and right to know what has been done with power and resources they entrusted to the current and immediately past leadership.  They have a right and need to know truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the ethically redacted truth about the squandering of their trust and treasure.


The public forum and subsequent school board member discussion provided some real irony last night.  Due to the number of speakers, the twice monthly opportunity to speak directly to the leadership of the APS for two minutes was reduced to one.

A number of speakers had prepared two minutes on what they would like to see in the interim and incoming superintendent.  They, we, have trouble condense an already condensed argument by half, and it is easy to run past 60 seconds.  For the most part, School Board Secretary Steven Michael Quezada cut off immediately at one minute.

In subsequent discussion the board can be seen and heard discussing how important it is, as they begin their process, to listen to the community.

They would have you believe, "the law" prevents them from dedicating more than one hour a month listening to interest and stakeholders.

It isn't the law, it is their own deliberate decision.
Just as it was their own deliberate decision to adopt
Marty Esquivel and Modrall's manifestly unconstitutional  
public participation in public meetings policy and procedural directives.

I defy any (First Amendment) lawyer, not in Marty Esquivel's or
Modrall's employ or service influence, to actually read the policy
and procedural directives and then attach their name and reputation
to their Constitutionality.

It is nothing but an excuse to funnel millions more dollars into
litigation that is for the most, against the public interests.

A couple of media people showed up; the Journal, KRQE, and at least two others.  They were recording from all over the room, so clearly APS Executive Director of Communication Monica Armenta, who was there and who was seen giving a videographer directions, did not enforce the procedural directive that requires all media and all persons desiring to record any school board meeting, to do so, from one particular place. The Esquivel Modrall rule clearly applies only to the press and all persons desiring, they don't like.

An interim superintendency should not include this ridiculousness.  An interim superintendency should not cost at least three teacher salaries in litigation against the public interests trying to make this pig fly.

During my 1 minute, I tried to point out the discrepancy between the standards of conduct that apply to students and the standards of conduct that apply to school board members and senior administrators.

One is a nationally recognized, accepted and respected code of ethical conduct, the other is "the law"; the standard of conduct that every higher standard is higher than.

I tried to point out what a difficult position in which this places both the interim and incoming superintendents.

I tried to convince them to lower student standards of conduct to eliminate the discrepancy.  I suggested they offer students access to lawyers and unlimited budgets for litigation in order to eliminate the disparity completely.

As awful as that solution sounds, it will at least eliminate the manifest hypocrisy in have school board members and senior administrators trying to establish and enforce higher standards of conduct on students than they will on themselves.

There will be no opportunity provided, where I or anybody else will be able to ask candidates to be the interim and/or incoming superintendent;

Will you, as the senior-most administrative role model
of student standards of conduct, do as you expect of students?

Will you model and promote (honest accountability to) the Pillars of Character Counts!, link; Respect Responsibility Trustworthiness (candor, forthrightness and honesty) Caring Fairness and Citizenship?

Funny story;

There were a number of public meetings during the last search for a superintendent.

I wanted to ask the candidates at those meetings, if they would be willing to step up as an honest to God role model of student standards of conduct.  I was never allowed to ask; the question never made it through their questions filter.

So there I was, standing against a wall holding up a poster and the question.

I was asked by the lady from the League of Women Voters who were running the meeting, if I would mind standing somewhere where the candidates couldn't see me.

I told her yes.

Call me idiosyncratic.




photo Mark Bralley