Ethics; the third rail in the examination of the APS debacle

"For those of you in Rio Linda ...";

Some large train sets, like subways, have three rails.
The third rail carries enormous amounts of electricity.
Touching one can be immediately fatal.

In (APS school board) politics, a third rail is;

A dangerous area of discussion, a point at which
the mere mention of a subject result is disaster.

Ethics, standards and accountability are APS' third rail.

Ethics, for the purposes of this discussion, can mean any standards of conduct higher than the law.  All "higher" standards are "higher than the law".  The law represents the lowest standards of conduct acceptable among civilized human beings.

Why will no one talk about ethics in the leadership of the APS?  Why does the mere mention of honest to God accountability to higher standards of conduct in public service mean disaster for the school board and senior administration?

For one, there is none.  Despite what the board would have you believe, there is no accountability to higher standards of conduct for anyone in the entire leadership of the APS.  The school board's own code of ethics is, by their own admission, utterly unenforceable.

There are two reasons as far as I can reason, that politicians and public servants in the leadership of APS will not hold themselves actually and honestly accountable higher standards of conduct; standards like those they establish and enforce upon students;

1. A lack of courage; they are afraid to be held actually accountable to higher standards of conduct than the law. and or

2. A lack of character; they do not want to be held accountable to higher standards of conduct than the law.

They avoid the conversation like the plague, because they can't articulate any good and ethical justification for their lack of accountability.

Interestingly, ethics and accountability are a third rail when it comes to the establishment's media as well.  Why?

1. It could be a lack of character.  Maybe I'm telling the truth when I say Journal Editor in Chief Kent Walz and others are part of a conspiracy to cover up an ethics, standards and accountability crisis in the leadership of the APS.

2.  It could be a lack of courage.  Perhaps they are afraid to point out the ethics and accountability crisis in the leadership of the APS because light will be cast on their own ethics and accountability.

Or, there could be another reason; one I cannot imagine,
and one that not one of them, has or will articulate.