the essence of inhumanity is indifference

The Genovese syndrome; also known as the bystander effect, or bystander apathy

The stink of it is; in New York City, in 1964, Kitty Genovese was stabbed to death by a serial rapist and murderer. The murder took place over a period of about thirty minutes, during which dozens of alleged "witnesses" failed to help the victim.

The parallel is that “dozens of witnesses” are watching honest accountability to a meaningful standard of conduct, being stabbed to death by APS Leaders, and are failing to help the victim.

As you can imagine, this phenomenon weighs heavily on me. I researched the Genovese syndrome in an effort to understand, why?

The first thing I found out is that individual bystanders are less likely to intervene if there are other bystanders.

According to the Wikipedia;”…the most common explanation of this phenomenon is that, with others present, observers all assume that someone else is going to intervene and so they each individually refrain from doing so. This is an example of how diffusion of responsibility leads to social loafing. People may also assume that other bystanders may be more qualified to help, such as being a doctor or police officer, and their intervention would thus be unneeded. People may also fear "losing face" in front of the other bystanders, being superseded by a "superior" helper, or offering unwanted assistance. Another explanation is that bystanders monitor the reactions of other people in an emergency situation to see if others think that it is necessary to intervene. Since others are doing exactly the same, everyone concludes from the inaction of others that other people do not think that help is needed. This is an example of pluralistic ignorance and social proof.”

“Furthermore, pluralistic ignorance is countered by the implication that all bystanders are indeed interested in helping, and social proof kicks in when one or more of the crowd steps in to assist.”

Or, Somebody should do something. If one person can summon the courage to intervene, they will be joined by others.

Is there an emergency? The concept of emergency is subjective, my emergency is not yours, and vice versa. Perhaps the question is not, is there an emergency, but, is there a problem worthy of investment in a solution?

The Josephson Institute does a survey of American Youth every two years. The survey and results appear to be reputable. The Institute’s website is the first source should you want to verify my summary.

The results indicate that among our sons and daughters; three of five agreed that, “In the real world, successful people do what they have to do to win, even if others consider it cheating”. Two of five believe that “A person has to lie or cheat sometimes in order to succeed”. One in five believes that “People who are willing to lie, cheat or break the rules are more likely to succeed than people who do not”. Four of five admit they lied to parent within the past 12 months about something significant.” Three of five admit they lied to teacher within the past 12 months about something significant”; one in three said they lied two or more times.”

One in three copied an internet document within the past 12 months; one in five did so two or more times. Three in five cheated during a test at school within the past 12 months; one in three did so two or more times. One in five stole something from a parent or other relative within the past 12 months; one in ten did so two or more times.

If this is not an emergency, perhaps we can agree that there is a problem whose solution is worthy of investment.

In 1998, the local CHARACTER COUNTS! task force surveyed parents in Albuquerque. Among the results; 94 percent agreed that "it is important to teach character education in the public schools."

Character education is not being taught in pubic schools whose leadership openly refuses to be held accountable to the same standard of conduct that they are telling students deserves their honest accountability.

I find myself very discouraged by the lack of attention that I am able to draw to what I think is an important problem. I really believe that the best interests of children are among the stakes on the table. I believe that there is an emergency.

It appears to me that my readers are comfortable sitting on the fence. No one will argue that the truth is misrepresented; yet no one is compelled by the truth to abandon their seat on the fence. In order to stand on my side of the fence you are required to help to spread the word, and at some point you will be asked to stand up for what you believe in. You will be required to speak up (at least symbolically) at the next board meeting, even if it is only by email.

This is about the message; it is not about the messenger.

For my part, I am not asking you to support me as a messenger; or in any other capacity. I will do that only once; when I ask you to vote for me as a candidate for the board seat representing School Board District 4.

In the mean time, I am asking only for your support of the principle. At the next public forum, I will ask the Board and Superintendent to respond to their lack of accountability to a meaningful standard of conduct.

If at that moment, you stand up; I will neither assume nor represent that by standing you offer support to me. By standing you will represent only that you too expect the Leadership of the APS to tell the truth about their honest accountability to a meaningful standard of conduct.

It would seem that I am the only one who cares. I suffer certainly; but so do the students in the Albuquerque Public Schools. That’s why I can’t just give up.

“The essence of inhumanity is indifference.” unk

Honest accountability to an ethical standard of conduct – What difference does it make?

Take for example; truth telling. According to the standard of least acceptable conduct; the law, you only have to tell the truth after having uncrossed your fingers behind your back.

At all other times, particularly if you are powerful, your fingers are tightly crossed behind your back and you have entirely justified deliberate deception.

In contrast, if you are accountable to a higher standard of conduct, like the one we have asked our children to embrace, then fingers don’t get crossed, ever.

The trustworthiness we expect from our children is diametrically opposite to any deception that can be justified by crossing your fingers behind your back. If we shake hands with our other hand behind our backs, our children will learn to do the same.

Every child needs to know what the line is. Every child needs to know that anyone who crosses that line must hold themselves accountable, even the role model. Otherwise the child is taught that it is acceptable, after having crossed the line, to then compound that misconduct by trying to escape the consequences.

It is not about being perfect. It is about being willing to accept the consequences of being imperfect.

It is about drawing a line. On one side of that line, a list of acceptable imperfections; and on the other, a list of unacceptable imperfections. It is about accepting the consequences of crossing the line.

If that can be done while a child is watching, then a child can be taught what it looks like to accept the consequences of misconduct.

Every generation expects the next generation to be the first to hold itself accountable to a higher standard of conduct. Invariably the next generation will hold itself accountable only to the standard modeled before them. Children, by in large, will not hold themselves accountable to a higher standard of conduct than the one modeled by their mentor.

We tell our children about George Washington and the cherry tree. We tell the story to illustrate our expectation that they will grow up holding themselves accountable to a higher standard of conduct.

If asked, we will say that we are models of a higher standard. We are leading by our example. We are expecting no more from those we lead, than we expect from ourselves.

Yet we teach them by our example, that the accouterments of power include exception from accountability; absolutely.

If the next generation is to grow up to embrace honor and courage and character; someone has to show them what it looks like.

If we want the next generation to hold it self honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct; someone has to show them what it looks like.

There is only one way to model honest accountability, and that is to hold yourself honestly accountable; willingly enter a situation where you will be held honestly accountable for your misconduct; even against your will.

Assume that you say that you support speed limits. Imagine that the ballot question before you asks; will you support installing what ever measures are necessary to insure inescapable accountability to an unequivocal standard with respect to speeding?

In other words; will you hold yourself honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct?

If you vote yes, you have walked your talk. The child who watches you will learn that principles are worthy of sacrifice.

It is not about being perfect. It is about being accountable.

I need two hundred people, who are willing to stand up for what they believe in, for two minutes.

Diogenes searched for years for one honest man. My task is to find but two hundred; two hundred men, women and children who are willing to stand up for two minutes while the following question is put to the Leadership of the Albuquerque Public Schools;

As Board Members and Senior Administrators; to what standard of conduct are you willing to be held honestly accountable?

By honest accountability it is meant: inescapable accountability to an unequivocal standard. It means accountability in the manner in which we want our children to understand it.

Are you willing to be held accountable to the standard to which 89,000 of our sons and daughters are accountable?

The Leaders of the APS must identify the standard to which they are accountable. They must present tp scrutiny, the process by which all allegations of their misconduct will see a principled resolution. By principled resolution it is meant; universally available, beyond undue influence, fair and impartial, and consistent with agreed upon principles of acceptable conduct, such as a code of ethical conduct.

It would seem to be a question that reasonably requires a response from any person who enjoys the public trust; in particular educational leadership.

To what standard of conduct will you be honestly accountable?

There is a counter at the bottom of this blog page. On the day that people visit this blog at the rate of 200 per day; I will attempt to organize a rally of those 200 people. We will stand together to respectfully deliver the question each member of the Board, the Superintendent, or their designee. We will hope that we have gathered in a number large enough to compel a reponse.

If a large enough crowd of people gather in one place to ask the question; the media will be compelled to cover the story. At that point every stakeholder in the District will have the opportunity to decide for themselves whether or not to protest the APS Leadership’s response to a legitimate question, stonewall. Stonewalling is not telling the truth.

This endeavor will not be supported by the media. I am compelled to toss it into the blogosphere and see what happens. They made a difference in Connecticut.

Please spread the word on Diogenes’six. Email friends, relatives, any stakeholder whose address you know. This can be done.

When it looks like we have the attention of 200 people, we will attempt to hold the Leadership of the APS honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct.

If we fail, we will have to do it again, and again if necessary; until the terms of public service, as defined by the public, are clearly defined.

I look forward to comments or questions.

So whadaya gonna do about it?

The little kid points out that the school yard bully is cheating. The bully asks, so whadaya gonna do about it? And the pretty much ends it.

Republican precincts get shorted ballots. So whadaya gonna do about it? The county clerk singly most responsible for the mistake, a manifestation of incompetence or corruption, will be promoted. She will enjoy a larger salary for a position in charge of even larger and more important elections. So much for accountability by voter.

Having disproved the illusion of accountability by voter; we are left with no accountability at all.

What ever has happened will happen again, and again, and again. Democrats will do it, Republicans will do it, Greens will do it, …

The problem isn’t the party, it is the system.

The system allows incompetence and corruption because it provides no honest accountability even for the most egregious misconduct.

Accountability is fatal to incompetence and corruption. It is not provided because accountability is not in the interests of those whose political existence depends upon a lack of accountability.

The first step to righting that which is wrong with public service, is to provide honest accountability for public servants; even against their will.

We can begin with the Albuquerque School Board, whose position against honest accountability is utterly indefensible. They are defended only by the Albuquerque Journal and Tribune, who together help to keep their dirty little secret.

Let’s hold them honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct; even against their will.

Albuquerque Public Schools; Smart Discipline?

In an Albuquerque Journal article entitled, Smart Discipline; an entirely superficial examination is afforded to the District’s response to discipline problems.

A deeper examination would have revealed that discipline problems in the District stem APS’ lack of a discipline philosophy. Philosophy is the connection between a goal and the policy that enables the goal to be achieved. It is the answer to a student’s question, Why not? The absence of a well thought out and grounded discipline philosophy is telling. It could not be more important.

For example; APS routinely permits prohibited behavior on schools campuses. Students who are told that sagging is prohibited; are allowed to sag habitually; in plain sight and in diametric opposition to District Policy.

Sagging, wearing pants so low as to expose underwear, is not the issue. Allowing students to ignore rules is the issue. Allowing students to take charge in school is the issue. Permitting prohibited behavior is the issue.

For the sake of discussion, let’s suppose that the goal is to provide an educationally efficient environment; an environment where teachers can teach and students can learn without distraction. APS’ response was to create a policy to prohibit sagging. They skipped the step of identifying the philosophical statement that connects sagging and the educational efficiency of the teaching and learning environment. That is why they ended up a policy that doesn't work. If the philosophy is that sagging does negatively affect the environment, then why is it permitted? If the philosophy is that sagging doesn’t affect the learning environment, then why is it prohibited?

One of the most basic philosophical statements with regard to effective discipline policy is that, if you have a rule, you should enforce it. Admittedly, it can be argued that enforcing a rule can cost more than the enforcement is worth. In effect, “Yes, sagging does negatively affect the environment, but not as negatively as fighting with kids all day long about their dress.” It is a legitimate point of view. The appropriate course is determined during the identification of a District discipline philosophy. And then based on the philosophy, one either prohibits sagging and enforces the rule, or one allows sagging and moves on to other issues. In no case is it appropriate to accustom children to routinely ignoring rules; a position without philosophical foundation and with far reaching negative consequences.

The second page headline reads; Discipline options smarten up suspensions. In practice, options are used by many administrators to make their own lives easier. If a principal wants to discipline a student with bellicose and powerful parents, the least harsh option is chosen. If the student is obnoxious and has disinterested parents, the harsher option is chosen. The disparate treatment does not escape the attention of either student. Nor does it escape the attention of other students.

Consider the following quote from the article; “At Valley, administrators use community service as a form of discipline. So a student busted for vandalizing the campus might be required to do something to beautify the school. Of course, it’s always on an individual case basis.”

In so far as students are concerned, "On an individual case basis" means only differential treatment, an unfair system unworthy of their respect or allegiance.

“On an individual case basis” is APS speak for permission to choose the consequence which creates the fewest waves. The Board of Education used that exact phrase when creating their policy for dealing with administrators who for instance, are charged with aggravated drunk driving. “On an individual case basis”, allows a favored administrator to escape consequences.

There is another telling quote in the article. “A lot of times, a kid is having a rotten day.” It represents a discipline philosophy that begins with making excuses for a child’s misconduct in order to trivialize the situation. Is this a philosophy that reflects the views of teachers, parents, or students? No, it isn’t. It is an unexamined administrative philosophy that allows administrators to avoid the nastiness of having to enforce the rules by imposing unpleasant consequences.

There are two ways that one can avoid honest accountability for their conduct; one is to muddy the expectations, the other is to corrupt the system by which one is held accountable.

The decision not to write a District discipline philosophy is deliberate. If there is no philosophy against which to measure conduct; conduct cannot be criticized; or, muddied expectations. They function beside the administrative immunity that is provided by the District’s failure to provide a system under which allegations of Administrative misconduct will receive a principled resolution. A principled resolution of a complaint is impartial, beyond undue influence, universally available, and consistent with agreed upon principles.

The simple truth is that the Leadership of the APS cannot provide discipline policies that guarantee an educationally efficient environment for students and teachers. They cannot because in large part, they will not accept honest accountability for themselves. They are not honestly accountable even to the standard that they established for and enforce upon students. They have refused publicly and repeatedly to hold themselves accountable to any meaningful standard of conduct.

Is it any surprise then, that many students make the same choice?

APS Board of Education; a model of clean government-

It isn’t of course, but it could be.

It stands to reason that the larger a government body is, the harder it will be to make substantial change. It stands to reason then that a small government body, a seven member elected school board, is the logical place to start a reform effort. The seven member board is the Achilles heel of governmental bodies that tolerate corruption and incompetence. A change there could well be the beginning of change everywhere.

Corruption and incompetence are the cause of almost every “bad” thing that a government does; wasted money, ineffective efforts, and every decision that serves private interests over public interests.

Accountability is fatal to corruption and incompetence.

To the extent that corruption and incompetence exist, it is because there is no accountability. Socrates is widely credited with observing that, “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Consider for a moment that it is not power, but the lack of accountability for the abuse of power which corrupts, absolutely.

If any public servant who abuses the power entrusted to them is held accountable, honestly and absolutely accountable for that abuse, how could it continue? It can’t.

Instead of accountability, people are offered an assurance; you can trust me. Trust is a poor substitute for accountability. How else can it be explained that government still suffers widely from the effects of corruption and incompetence? Even after all of the years of opportunity to eliminate corruption and incompetence.

Transparency is an excellent example of a concrete step toward accountability. Yet transparency does not exist. Those who we have trusted to protect our interests have yet to provide a level of transparency that provides protection against the ravages of corruption and incompetence. It is naïve to expect that they will. You cannot expect a wo/man to eliminate corruption and incompetence when their political being depends on their existence.

All that is necessary to provide for honest accountability to a meaningful standard of conduct in the Albuquerque Public Schools is to remove the current board and elect in their place seven men and women who are willing, in their public service, to be held accountable, honestly accountable.

The current Board, Paula Maes, Leonard DeLayo, Robert Lucero, Berna Facio, Miguel Acosta, Gordon Rowe, and Mary Lee Martin, has individually and collectively renounced honest accountability to a meaningful standard of conduct. It is on the record.

DeLayo, Acosta, and Lucero’s board seats are up for election in February 2007. They need to be replaced by three individuals who in their role as public servants, as role models for 98,ooo school children, and as stewards of hundreds of millions of tax dollars, are willing to be held accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct.

Someone needs to run against them. It would seem that anyone willing to stand for accountability would be a shoe in.

Any takers?

Character Counts: a vehicle for fraud.

Proof? …just ask any of its advocates to take some lumps in its defense.

At some point you have to hold yourself accountable to the standard you promote. If you don’t, you are a hypocrite, a charlatan, a fraud.

The leadership of the Albuquerque Public Schools requires students to model and promote the Pillars of Character Counts. Students are expected to hold themselves accountable to a higher standard of conduct (than the law; the lowest standard of (acceptable) conduct). It is the principle we illustrate when we tell children the story of George Washington and the cherry tree. We expect children to revere George Washington as a hero worthy of emulation because he had the moral courage to hold himself accountable to a higher standard of conduct.

The Leadership of the APS has renounced the same higher standard for themselves. For reasons that they will not admit, reasons that enjoy no ethical justification, they have refused to hold themselves honestly accountable to the Pillars of Character Counts. They will not model before students, the behavior that they expect from students. They have renounced their obligations as role models for 6,000 employees and 98,000 students.

They have escaped the consequences of their decision largely because the Albuquerque Journal and Tribune refuse to investigate or report upon their actions, even through two elections.

The situation would be resolved by public exposure. Because the Journal and Tribune won’t report the truth, a number of persons who cast a longer shadow than I, have been asked to use their influence to illuminate the situation. They have refused. They are apparently unwilling to take some lumps in defense of Character Counts.

Among those who know of the APS ethics scandal and who refuse to stand and be counted are:
• Michael Josephson, the founder of Character Counts.
• Senator Pete Domenici, among those who helped to write the six pillars of character.
• Mayor Martin Chavez, who when he gets the chance, calls himself a founding influence of Character Counts in Albuquerque.
• Albuquerque’s City Councilors, who have failed to protect the interests of their constituents.
• The Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce, in the person of Teri Cole, who wears a Character Counts badge.
• Every Church Leader whose email address I could find in a long evening of searching for help.
• The Albuquerque Teachers Federation, who under Don Whatley, brought Character Counts to APS.

When push comes to shove, no one will stand up and be counted. I can’t tell you why; I don’t understand why.

Perhaps it is as simple as the fact that you can’t stand up for Character Counts without being willing to be held honestly accountable to the Pillars of Character Counts yourself. Perhaps it is as simple as the fact that these people are simply frauds; they will advocate for Character Counts for as long as it serves their interests. But when it comes right down to it, …?

Every generation expects the next generation to be the first to hold itself honestly accountable to a higher standard of conduct. Every next generation has then fallen short of that expectation. They have however, managed to live up to the example that has been set for them.

If we really want our children to embrace character and honor and courage; I mean REALLY want them to embrace character and honor and courage; someone has to show them what it looks like.

People are fond of saying “Somebody should do something!” Apparently what they really mean is “Somebody ELSE should do something.” And that is why things are getting worse rather than better.

“…in no case shall the standard for adults be lower than the standard for students…”

That phrase and expectation used to be part of the APS employee standards of conduct. It is a powerful premise. It recognizes the inherent power in leading by example. It recognizes the obligation of role models. It justified morally, the authority of adults over children.

When the Leadership of the APS lowered the standard to which they would be held accountable, they did so be removing that phrase from their code of conduct. No longer would they be held accountable to the student standard of conduct; the Pillars of Character Counts; a widely recognized, accepted and respected code of ethical conduct.

They removed that expectation for only one reason. There is only one reason to oppose honest accountability; to avoid the consequences of misconduct.

A number of board members and senior administrators are the subjects of legitimate allegations of ethical and criminal misconduct, including felony criminal misconduct. Using taxpayer support of “education”, they paid lawyers to manipulate the law to escape the principled resolution of those allegations. They are not accountable even to the law, the lowest standard of acceptable conduct.

Were they accountable to an ethical standard of conduct, they would not be able to pervert justice to their interests. That is why they are fighting so hard to escape honest accountability to the student standard of conduct; an ethical standard.

They are like the school yard bully telling their victim, "So what, what are you going to do about it?" They are so powerful that they cannot be held accountable for their misconduct; unless they can be held accountable to an ethical standard. In a court of “ethics”, their power cannot be used to escape accountability. There will be a principled resolution of the allegations made against them.

But they will not be held accountable to an ethical standard; not as the role models for 98,000 of our sons and daughters, and not as the stewards of hundreds of millions of tax dollars. Because you can’t make them.

There is no other reason to do what they are doing. If there is another reason what is it? Why won’t they answer the question, “Will you hold yourself accountable, honestly accountable, to the same standard of conduct as students?

There is only one reason to oppose honest accountability and that is to avoid the consequences of misconduct. There is no defense of their action unless there is some other legitimate, and ethical, explanation for their refusal to be held accountable to a higher standard of conduct.

“All that is necessary for evil to prevail in the world, is for good men to do nothing.” Burke

They will prevail unless people stand up for what they believe in. They will prevail if YOU do nothing.

Character Counts Leadership Council has been betrayed

(This is a repost of a September post. I have since found out that members of the council have not been informed about the APS ethics scandal.)

By way of background; Character Counts represents a widely recognized, accepted and respected code of ethics. It is the standard to which students in APS are held accountable. In my opinion, it is by far the most promising approach to children who we hope will come to embrace character and courage and honor.

It is also a network of organizations from locals to a national site. It is worth a google.

• The Character Counts Leadership Council is the local.
• There is also a Character Counts Office in APS; headed by one Carole Smith.
• Paula Maes, the School Board President, is also the President of the Leadership Council.
• As it pertains to (the lack of) attention by the media, Paula Maes is the President of the New Mexico Broadcasters Association.
• Paula Maes husband is the President of APS’s legal arm; the Modrall Law Firm.

As part of my strategy to address the APS Ethics Scandal, I have been trying to get people of gravitas to stand up and be counted in opposition to the efforts of the Leaders of APS.


I have tried to approach the Character Counts Leadership Council. It is difficult because the APS site where their contact information would be proudly displayed; displays only a bankrupt excuse for its absence.

I believe that APS Leaders have violated the New Mexico Inspection of Public Records Act, in their failure to provide contact information for the members of the Council. They have also failed to provide information to contact administrators; and teachers, and students, and their parents.

There are several people who know that I want to tell the Council the truth. And they sit on the Council. What have they shared with the Council? Do Council members know that their President, Paula Maes, refuses to be held honestly accountable to the Pillars of Character Counts? Do they know that APS Leaders have all excepted themselves from accountability to the Pillars of Character Counts?

That they know; is important. Character Counts recognizes the stakeholder right to autonomous decision making. They have a right to the truth. They have a right to decide for themselves whether they will ignore the APS Ethics Scandal, or will they stand up and be counted? They are being denied the right to make that decision by those who are suppressing the truth.

According to Character Counts doctrine:

In relationships involving legitimate expectations of trust, honesty may also require candor, forthrightness and frankness, imposing the obligation to volunteer information that another person needs to know.

It would seem that council members, who know the truth, have some obligation to tell it.

Unless of course, there is no legitimate expectation of trust.

Sincerity: if you can fake that, you've got it made. Daniel Schorr

There is something especially obnoxious about betraying trust among people who place such high value upon it.

Their names are Paula Maes, Carole Smith, Toby Herrera, Dee Dee Stoud, and Lisa Breeden. In an odd irony, Lisa Breeden works for one of the founding fathers of Character Counts, Senator Pete Domenici.

My record at APS

And so it begins. If you read the comments on the following post, “APS Leadership disgraces itself yet again”, you will find a post from “anonymous” (of course), who suggests that I had behaved “inappropriately” with students when I was a teacher.

There is a record of my career as a teacher. It is a public record; which means if any person asks for the opportunity to inspect and or copy it, they have a lawful right to do so. There is a State Statute called the Inspection of Public Records Act. According to the law, APS must surrender any public record in it possession or under its control, to anyone who asks for it.

The “record” of my career contains every public record generated by the allegations I have made against administrators and board members, records generated by the allegations that they have made against me, and records that were produced subsequent to those allegations.

I have asked for that record on a number of occasions. I have been denied access on every occasion. The reason that I have been denied that access is that, the record contains incontrovertible proof of ethical and criminal misconduct, including felony criminal misconduct, by high ranking APS Administrators and Board Members.

Although the law requires the surrender of public records, the Leadership of the APS has, by and through their lawyers at Modrall (whose President is married to School Board President Paula Maes; herself the subject of allegations of misconduct), managed through legal weaselry, to avoid having to surrender the record.

I have nothing to hide. I have always insisted, and continue to insist without reservation, that the entire public record be made available to anyone who wants to see it. I have offered, and continue to offer, to submit to polygraphy regarding any allegation made by me or against me. I have previously taken and passed a polygraph regarding the then current allegations.

If you choose not to believe this allegation, contact APS front man and Custodian of Public Records, Rigo Chavez. Ask him if he will surrender the entire public record surrounding the allegations made by me and against me.

Any answer except yes, is no.

APS Leadership Disgraces Itself Yet Again

For at least the eighth time in as many meetings of the Albuquerque Public Schools Board of Education, the Board and Superintendent were asked, Are you willing to hold yourselves honestly accountable to the same standard of conduct that you enforce upon students, or, explain why you will not?

Perhaps out of shame, perhaps in simple arrogance, their eyes and attention immediately shifted to the paperwork on the table before them. During the next two minutes of deafening silence, unable to meet the eyes of a single member of the standing room only audience, they fiddled with the imaginary task of sorting their paperwork.

For the at least the eighth time they have renounced their obligation as the senior role models for the District’s 6,000 employees and 98,000 students. Students are required to model and promote the Pillars of Character Counts, a widely recognized, accepted and respected code of ethics. The Board has eliminated accountability for itself even to their recently lowered Employee Standards of Conduct; because they are “not really employees”.

And for the eighth time this disgraceful display by the stewards of hundreds of millions of tax dollars will not be reported by the Albuquerque Journal or Tribune, which together have refused to investigate or report upon the APS Ethics Scandal, even through the elections of board members and a 350 million dollar bond issue.

APS Ethics Scandal; pick a side, cowboy up.

(this is a repeat of an September post)

There is a fight going on.

On one side is the Leadership of the APS. They refuse to hold themselves honestly accountable to the same standard of conduct that applies to students. They refuse to be role models of the student standard of conduct.

On the other side there are those who believe that the Leadership of the APS should lead by their example. That they should be honestly accountable at the very least, to the student standard of conduct.

I don’t know how to use the phrase, “battle between good and evil” with out sounding histrionic. But if this is not, what is? I don’t know how much clearer the line can be drawn.

I don’t know how the stakes could higher.

There are times in life where you pretty much have to pick a side. You watch, you consider, and you find that you simply must pick a side.

The moment of truth is that time when you realize what you have to do; and then must summon the courage to do it.

Confucius wrote, "To know what is right and not to do it is the worst cowardice."

Those who wait for better circumstances to make their stand, in the end will have made no stand at all.

Climbing off the fence will always mean sacrifice. It often requires courage.

When the danger has passed, so has the opportunity to display courage. The line between heroism and cowardice is in fact, a point. It is a moment. And when the moment has passed; the same act will never be more than too little and too late.

If we truly want our children to embrace character and courage and honor, then we must show them what it looks like. Now is a moment of truth.

I confess to an admiration for the builders of Stonehenge. The admiration isn’t inspired by the moving and placing of giant stones. A greater wonder is that someone could say something that compelled so many people to help with such a monumental and seemingly impossible task.

I wish that I knew what to say to get a few hundred people to go to a school board meeting.

Albuquerque Journal takes a shot at APS’ lack of accountability; misses the target.

APS has failed to adequately account for the spending of a couple of million tax dollars. As bad as that is, how do we know that it isn’t going to happen again this year? We don’t.

Assume for the sake of argument that the Peter Principle is valid; people get promoted for a job well done until they are finally promoted into a job that they can’t do. Realize that APS, according to an independent audit, evaluates administrators by a system that is “subjective and unrelated to promotion or step placement”. The combination seems to substantiate the supposition that inadequate accounting has to do with some administrator doing a job s/he can’t really do. Perhaps s/he didn’t to the job because they just didn’t feel like it. Maybe they didn’t even know it was their job.

The point is that nothing has happened that addresses the problem; there is no reason to believe that anything different will happen this year. That possibility is underscored by APS’ front man Rigo Chavez, who apparently thinks it was the city’s job to collect the data.

APS obviously doesn’t care about the job not being done. They have been dodging accountability forever. And because the Journal can’t be bothered to track down the responsible party or process, nothing has changed.

The whole idea behind accountability is to make sure that the same mistake is not made twice; or three times, or over and over again.

What the Journal Editors won’t report is that the leadership of the APS stands squarely against honest accountability to any meaningful standard of conduct for board members or administrators.

Bullseye.

It’s the system, stupid

The problem: public service does not serve public interests. Instead, public service serves private and personal interests. In so far as it is corrupt to use the power given to public servants for any interest except the public interest; the failure to serve the public interest is the manifestation of corruption and incompetence among public servants.

There are those who believe that the problem can be solved by electing a particular candidate or slate of candidates. The underlying contradiction that utterly destroys that belief, is the two hundred years of history leading up to a system that still enables corruption and incompetence. It is naïve to expect that the system can be fixed by electing a particular candidate or slate of candidates. It has been suggested that proof of insanity lies in doing the same thing over and over and over, and expecting a different result.

Imagine rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Imagine rearranging public servants. What is the difference?

Honest accountability to a meaningful standard of conduct is the only defense against corruption and incompetence. It is the perfect defense. Honest accountability is fatal to corruption and incompetence. It is that fact that accounts for the fact that those who benefit from corruption and incompetence never have and never will, provide honest accountability for their (mis)conduct.

The public cannot expect to change the system through intermediaries. It has not happened. It is not happening. It will not happen.

There is an opportunity for the public to change the system without depending on intermediaries; an opportunity to directly affect (change) the system.

There is a small group of elected officials in their version of the Titanic. It is possible to throw them and their lawyers, out of the boat. It is possible to take command of the boat and plug the leak in the hull. It is the time and the place for mutiny.

The axis of the APS Board, Superintendent, and Modrall, are opponents of honest accountability in their public service. Their position is indefensible. Their only defense is provided by the local media, primarily the Albuquerque Journal and Tribune, who have helped them suppress the truth about the APS Ethics Scandal.

If the story can be made public, even against the manifest will of the Journal and Tribune editors, those who have betrayed the public trust will be removed. They will be replaced by those who will hold themselves honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct. They will be replaced by those who have the moral courage to provide for honest accountability; even against their will.

If only the scandal could be made public.

Albuquerque Mayor Martin Chavez; MIA on the APS Ethics Scandal

Is there a scandal? I submit that there is based on the following facts. The leadership of the APS has repeatedly refused to hold itself honestly accountable to the same standard of ethical conduct that it enforces upon students. Further, the leadership of the APS pays lawyers to litigate unethically to save board members and senior administrators from the principled resolution of allegations of ethical and criminal misconduct; including felony criminal misconduct.

These facts represent an ethics scandal. These facts have never been refuted; by anyone.

Martin Chavez is aware of these facts. He also claims to be a founding supporter of Character Counts in Albuquerque. The Pillars of Character Counts represent the widely recognized, accepted and respected code of ethics that students are required to model and promote. It is the code of ethics to which every single board member and the superintendent have repeatedly refused to be held honestly accountable.

The scandal exists only because the local media, primarily the Albuquerque Journal and Tribune, refuse to investigate or report upon it. All Mayor Chavez has to do to end the scandal is to call public attention to it. He has that power and that responsibility.

If Mayor Chavez truly believes in Character Counts, then by its tenets, he is required to stand up for what he believes in; to stand up and be counted for honest accountability to a meaningful standard of conduct.

Perhaps he has been told by the leadership of the APS, that if he challenges them to accept honest accountability to the Pillars of Character Counts, they will challenge him to do the same. Perhaps that is why the people who run the Journal and Tribune will not stand up to be counted. Perhaps that is the reason that Character Counts founding father, Senator Pete Domenici will not stand up. Maybe when this stink is boiled down to its essence, the essential truth is that accountability to a higher standard of conduct is not for adults; it is only for children.

Through out history, accountability, honest accountability, to a higher standard of conduct has always been the expectation for the next generation of adults; not the current generation. We tell our kids about George Washington and the cherry tree to inspire them to embrace a higher standard; not ourselves.

Somebody who casts a shadow longer than I, must stand up to be counted. If not, the senior role models for 98,000 of our sons and daughters, and the stewards of hundreds of millions of tax dollars will continue to dodge accountability to any standard higher that the law. They will continue to dodge accountability even to the law; the lowest standard of acceptable conduct.

That situation is unacceptable. It is not in the interests of taxpayers, parents, teachers or students.

APS lacks accountability; again, and again, and again, and again …

According to this morning’s Albuquerque Journal, the APS have violated city contracts by failing to properly track the spending of millions of tax dollars.

The Journal didn’t use the word “again”. They know better. The leadership of the APS is all about dodging accountability whether for corruption or incompetence. It starts at the top. The board and superintendent have repeatedly refused, in public and on the record, to be held accountable to any meaningful standard of conduct. They will not be held accountable even to the standard that they have established for students.

Does it surprise anyone that there is then no accountability among their subordinates; from assistant superintendents down to principals?

Forget for the moment that they are refusing to recognize that they are role models for 98,000 of our sons and daughters. (How can we forget that, even for a moment?) They are stewards of hundreds of millions of tax dollars. Their failure to hold themselves accountable to any meaningful standard of conduct as they administer those funds; enables, in fact encourages, incompetence and corruption; wasted tax dollars.

The Journal did not use the word “again”. They, and the Albuquerque Tribune, steadfastly refuse to investigate or report upon the APS Ethics Scandal. As a result, tax dollars are gone; stolen by the corrupt and wasted by the incompetent.

Whose interests are being protected by the Journal and Tribune? Clearly it is not the interests of taxpayers, parents, teachers, or students.

New Mexico Educator Ethics (Shmethics) Bureau

Within the Public Education Department lies the Educator Ethics Bureau. It is the mechanism used by administrators to hold teachers accountable for ethical misconduct. However well it serves in that respect; when a teacher tries to hold an administrator accountable for ethical misconduct, it serves exponentially less well.

Almost two years ago, a complaint was filed against APS’ Superintendent Elizabeth Everitt. The complaint alleged that the effort, to save administrators and board members from accountability for ethical and criminal misconduct, was itself unethical.

Yesterday, I sought information on the outcome of that complaint and another complaint. I contacted one Paul Calderon, the Director of the Educator Ethics Bureau. He informed me that “The case is still under investigation. At this time no information is allowed to be given until the investigation is completed.”

So, almost two years later, the Educator Ethics Bureau is still investigating whether or not dodging ethical and legal accountability is unethical.

Frankly, I find it hard to believe. It seems a lot more plausible that in fact, Elizabeth Everitt (and her lawyers) enjoy the same exception to honest accountability that every powerful person in New Mexico enjoys. It is worth noting that although the Bureau is supposed to acknowledge that a complaint has been received, I have not received that letter of acknowledgement for either complaint. That situation enables, I suppose, that at some time the Bureau can argue that they never, in fact, received a complaint.

I would like to hold the Ethics Bureau accountable for the mishandling of my complaints. The effort requires two things; a standard against which their conduct can be measured, and a system under which the complaint will be resolved.

On the Ethics Bureau’s website, there is a link to “Our Rules”. The link doesn’t link. So much for a standard against which to measure their conduct. Before he started ignoring my emails, Calderon had been asked five times for access to the rules. Five times he ignored my request.

As to a system by which he might be held accountable; twice I asked Calderon for the name of the person with whom I could file a complaint over his obfuscation of the follow up on my complaints. Twice he ignored my request.

So there it is. No rules against which to measure his misconduct and no system under which his misconduct can be reported. It would seem his Directorship of the Educator Ethics Bureau has more to do with personal connections than personal example.

Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics is feckless

There is an old adage about buying padlocks; locks only keep out honest people. The understanding is that an honest person will recognize and respect the boundary implied by even the cheapest padlock, and a dishonest person will neither recognize nor respect that boundary implied by the heaviest lock.

Similarly, codes of ethics are of little use to ethical people; they simply do not need reiteration of boundaries. Unethical people will not be bound by them under any circumstance. In particular if the code is unenforceable as is the Journalists’ Code of Ethics.

Take for example, Albuquerque’s Tribune and Journal. Their refusal to report on a widespread ethics scandal in the Albuquerque Public Schools clearly violates the Journalists’ Code of Ethics. But what is one to do? There is no body to which they can be reported; no system by which they can be held accountable. Like a burglar with a ten pound sledgehammer against a cheap padlock, they will have their way.

Like a 79 cent padlock, the Code is useless in protecting the community even against the most egregious betrayal of their interests and trust.

The APS Ethics Scandal, the fight, the combatants, the MIA.

The scandal; the leaders of the Albuquerque Public Schools have decided that they will not be held accountable for their (mis)conduct. They have eliminated standards against which their conduct can be measured. They have rendered powerless any system by which they might be held accountable even to the meaningless standards that remain.

The stakes are not unimportant. Students no longer have role models of accountability to a higher standard of conduct. The story of George Washington and the cherry tree has been reduced to an exercise in hypocrisy. Community members now have no choice but to entrust hundreds of millions of tax dollars to individuals, not one of whom will accept accountability even to the law. Parents have been denied their right to meaningful participation, by silencing of their citizen advisory councils. Teachers have been denied the basic rights of citizenship; level two grievances can be denied without a hearing, teachers are not allowed to record meetings in which they are active participants; even disciplinary proceedings. It cannot be argued that the leaders of the APS have excepted themselves from accountability without cost.

In any fight, there are opponents and indifferent bystanders. On the side of dodging accountability are the men and women who run the district, their lawyers, and the local media. Least powerful in the axis are the board and administration. When the details of the scandal are finally revealed, it is likely that they will simply disappear. Their position is absolutely indefensible. Their lawyers on the other hand have seemingly unlimited influence. Feeding at the bottomless trough of unwitting taxpayer support for “education”; they have the capacity to save the leadership from accountability even to the law. And finally, there is the media. Were the scandal to become public, the leadership and their lawyers would fall. The media has steadfastly refused to report upon the scandal; even through two elections. They are aware of the scandal; their support for the leaders of the APS is considered and deliberate. They are responsible, more than any other participant, for the continued success of the board members and senior administrators in dodging accountability for their misconduct.

Allied against them; me. I have tried for a dozen years to create for the board and administration honest accountability to a meaningful standard of conduct. If there is anyone else standing up against this egregious betrayal of trust, they are unknown to me.

The MIA, those who know the truth and who enable to the scandal to remain unquestioned, are a constant disappointment. They include:

Senator Pete Domenici; a founding father of Character Counts.
Michael Josephson, the founder of Character Counts.
Martin Chavez, Mayor of Albuquerque
Members of Albuquerque’s City Council; Ken Sanchez, Debbie O’Malley, Isaac Benton, Brad Winter, Michael Cadigan, Martin Heinrich, Sally Mayer, Craig Loy, and Don Harris. (In fairness, I represent that these individuals are aware because I emailed the truth to them. If they represent that they are unaware because the message was not forwarded to them by a mail screener, I cannot maintain otherwise. The exception is Brad Winter who has witnessed the scandal firsthand as a member of the audience during a number of School Board Meetings where the board refused to be held accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct; the scandal manifest.)
The Albuquerque Teachers Federation. The Federation’s failure to stand up and be counted is particularly upsetting because it was the Federation who brought Character Counts to the APS. Their failure negatively impacts the teachers whom they represent.
Teri Cole and the Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce who bask in the warmth of their claim to support Character Counts, but don’t.
The Character Counts Leadership Council. I will concede that the efforts to keep them in the dark may have been successful; however unlikely that possibility now seems.
APS senior and subordinate administrators. In their defense; APS’ culture of retaliation and retribution, makes the potential cost for standing up to be counted, higher than the cost for most. There is a concerted effort to keep them in the dark as well.
Finally, the untold numbers of eyewitnesses at board meetings and recipients of my emails begging for their support. Those who are apparently willing to do nothing but sit by and watch the scandal live on.

The board and senior administration will not end the scandal. Their lawyers will do what makes them rich. The media will not report it.

The scandal will end when the MIA stand up to be counted. Or it will never end.

Albuquerque Journal’s Amy Miller saves ink; reports half the truth

When a reader reads a newspaper article on a school board meeting, what do they expect to find? I submit that they expect to be told the truth, the whole truth. I submit that they would be disappointed to find that a part of the truth had been deliberately withheld. In particular I submit that they would feel betrayed when they find out that the truth has not been told at the behest of powerful people who manipulate reporters and newspapers to hide personal guilt; to avoid accountability for misconduct.

During the board meeting, it was entered into the record, that the broadcast version of a previous meeting had been falsified. APS gave a dishonestly edited videotape to a local TV station for broadcast. Viewers were deliberately misled.

The proof of this allegation is on the record. There is the tape of the broadcast version which can be compared to the “official” version and to the memories of anyone at the meeting. APS’ Rigo Chavez declares that this is not “dishonest” because the broadcast version is not the “official” record. His argument is as compelling as the school yard belief it is OK to lie if you cross your fingers behind your back.

It stands to reason that a reporter cannot report everything. Some judgment must be exercised regarding that which is important enough to burden readers with additional copy.

The Board was asked again, in recognition of National Character Counts Week, to hold themselves accountable to that standard; the standard they enforce upon students. Ms. Miller (and/or her boss) apparently feel that the Board and Administration’s seventh refusal to be held honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct, is also unworthy of mention.

Apparently Amy Miller and/or her boss, think the fact that APS has deliberately deceived the community regarding their unwillingness to be held accountable for their misconduct, is unimportant.

I can’t help but feel that readers would disagree. I think they would feel betrayed.