Wednesday, December 03, 2014

Esquivel; plenty of money for his lawyers. For educator legislators, not so much.

In the Journal, link, a report on the APS committee meeting last night and the passage of a policy change that would enable three administrators to be paid for their legislative service, the same as the one teacher who serves.

The board voted 6-1 in favor of the policy change.
The lone dissenting vote was cast by Marty Esquivel.
He says, APS can't afford to do their part to support a citizen legislature arguing;

“Yes, we have a citizen legislature. Yes, we want to encourage people from all walks of life to participate. But that doesn’t mean we have to finance it, especially now that our resources are so limited”.

While it is true that operational funds are limited, access to them is not.

Principals looking for money to hire more teachers will be told that there is no money left.

School board members, looking for lawyers to enable them to escape the consequences of their corruption and incompetence, have unlimited access to operational funds no matter how limited.

Marty Esquivel and the board have already spent $750,000 in defense of their and Marty Esquivel's ego in my case alone.  They have spent the money in unrecorded meetings in secret and without real oversight.  Subordinate oversight and self-oversight over their spending are not oversight, they are oxymora.

If there is to be a change in the APS, it will begin by replacing board members who are squandering our trust and treasure.

There is no reason to believe that Esquivel isn't going to run for re-election.

Esquivel needs to stay on the school board in order to brow beat the rest into continuing pour operational dollars into his defense.

He and they fully intend to spend another $250,000 on a non-viable defense of his and the board's violations of my civil rights.

He and they are still spending without limit, in unrecorded meetings in secret, and without real oversight.

The issues in the election and in the appointment of the next superintendent are two;
  1. ethics and standards, and 
  2. accountability.
What are the rules; who has to obey them?
What happens when they won't?

Any candidate who avoids questions about the ethics, standards and accountability they will bring to their public service, is unfit to serve as one of the senior-most role models for students, staff and community.

If we really want students to grow into adults who embrace character and courage and honor, someone has to show them what they look like; at least for those few hours during the day, when they are serving the public interests.

photos Mark Bralley


Anonymous said...

Anyone know if his "governor appointment" came through, or does he have to run for the board again? Also, wonder if the union will again endorse him after all he has done to teachers?

At any rate, if you run Ched, you have my vote!

ched macquigg said...

The union endorsement process confounds me. I don't expect ever to get it, but there will never be another candidate with more respect for their combined tens of thousands of years of experience than I.

thanks for commenting and for your support