APS Supt. evaluations will continue in secret

There are two kinds of business that the APS school board does in secret;

1.  the business that is kept secret according to the requirements of the law, and

2.  the business they keep secret in order to mislead stake and interest holders about their character and competence.

The APS Board of Education is considering how they will go about evaluating superintendents from now on, link.

They intend to continue to do it in secret.  There is no part of the evaluation that includes the meaningful participation of stake and interest holders; or for that matter, even happens in plain view of the people whose power and resources are being spent.

The board is the first to admit that they've lost the trust of their constituents.  A number of board members have admitted as much, point blank.  Yet, they continue to continue to behave as if we trust still them to protect our interests when they close the doors in our faces.  Else, how do you explain their planning of more unnecessarily secret meetings?

They can behave this way because they are essentially unaccountable to anyone except each other.

They are, by their own free admission, utterly unaccountable even to their own code of ethics.  They abdicated en masse from their duties and responsibilities as the senior-most role models of APS student standards of conduct; the Pillars of Character Counts!; a nationally recognized, accepted and respected code of ethical conduct.

The board and senior administrators don't feel the consequences of their abandonment of their duties as the district's senior-most role models because the Journal and the Kabal remain complicit, or at best complacent, regarding the cover up of the ethics, standards and accountability crisis in the leadership of the APS.

School board members and superintendents are essentially unaccountable even to the law; the lowest standards of conduct acceptable to civilized human beings.  They evade legal, even criminal consequences, by means of access to an unlimited budget for cost-is-no-object litigation and legal weaselry.  They spend money in (more) meetings in secret and without any real oversight.  Subordinate oversight is not oversight; it is an oxymoron. 

As but one example and most recently, the board knowingly permitted or negligently allowed a board member, Marty Esquivel, to squander $863K on litigation and legal weaselry in order to buy for himself an admission of "no guilt" in a settlement agreement, despite incontrovertible evidence of his guilt beyond any reasonable doubt.

The worst thing any politician or public servant can do, is anything they do in unnecessary secret from the people whose power they wield and whose resources they spend.

There is only one reason the board meets in unjustifiable secrecy, and that is to avoid the consequences of the truth about their character and their competence from being known to anyone but each other.