Response from School Board President David Peercy

Mr MacQuigg,

As we have discussed at length in the past, the existing personnel policies/procedural directives on ethical conduct already do require all employees to be a role model for students.

And, there is considerable additional information and examples of what being a role model means in terms of actions. Being a role model indeed means that employees, including board members, are in fact held to a higher standard of conduct than those persons (eg students) who would benefit from the role model. That is the requirement for all APS employees.

I reference you to the policies and procedural directives in the APS website under the Personnel category. https://www.aps.edu/about-us/policies-and-procedural-directives/policies/g.-personnel/gb2-staff-standards-of-conduct

Sincerely,
Dr David E Peercy
President, APS Board of Education

I take issue with Peercy’s contention; that he is accountable … to a higher standard of conduct than those persons (eg students) who would benefit from the role model.

Peercy has made this claim before. As before, he does not name any particular standards of conduct. His reference to APS standards of conduct reflects that. Nor does he appreciate apparently, the difference between being "required" to be a role model and being "accountable" as a role model.

Following is the reference he cites with problems in parentheses.

“District personnel shall maintain the highest standard of conduct (saying “highest” standard of conduct is not articulating an actual standard) and act in a mature and responsible manner at all times. District personnel shall not engage in activities which violate federal, state or local statues (the law represents the lowest standards of conduct acceptable to civilized human beings not “higher standards” of conduct) and regulations or which, in any way, diminish the integrity, efficiency or discipline of the district. Employees shall be required to comply with administratively established standards of conduct.

Albuquerque Public Schools staff shall maintain appropriate professional behavior while working with students and refrain from harassment, malicious or prejudicial treatment, or abridgement of student rights.

Employees of the Albuquerque Public Schools shall serve as positive role models (a positive role model is by no means, a model of honest to God accountability to the same ethical standards of conduct that the board created and has enforced upon students) for students and set good examples in conduct, manners, dress and grooming. Employees shall be suitably attired and groomed during working hours and while attending district-sponsored events.”

Peercy’s response does not justify his refusal to allow the board to revisit the 1994 resolution in order to rescind, amend or re-endorse it. Nor does it explain why if he really believes he and the board are already accountable as role models, that they would refuse to discuss replacing in their own standards of conduct, their role modeling clause; in no case shall the standards of conduct for an adult be lower than the standards of conduct for students.

Peercy needs to stop claiming accountability to even higher standards than student standards; there are none.

There are no higher standard of conduct than APS student standards of conduct (per the Student Handbook) which require students to model and promote honest accountability to the Pillars of Character Counts!; a nationally, recognized and respected code of “ethical conduct”. There is no process by which Peercy or any other board member or senior administrator can be held accountable to ethical standards of conduct.

Under Peercy’s rule, the board has spent literally millions of dollars on cost-is-no-object legal defenses for school board members and senior administrators. They are arguably unaccountable even to the law.

I call on Peercy’s response entirely inadequate for the senior most of the senior most role models in the APS.