Darren White appointment; political cronyism?

Is the Pope a Catholic? Does a bear whiz in the woods?

Among standards of conduct that apply to pols and public servants;

• thou shalt not create the appearance of a conflict of interest
• and thou shalt not create the appearance of impropriety.

These standards are necessary because creating even the
"appearance" of political cronyism does every bit as much
damage to confidence in the trustworthiness of our government,
as cronyism itself; perception is reality.

Consider then the appointment by Governor Susana Martinez of Darren White to the Judicial Standards Commission.

If you google; +"Darren White" +"Judicial Standards Commission", you will get nearly 3700 hits; nearly all of them pointing to the appearances of conflicts of interest and impropriety, and political cronyism.

They point out a number of really good reasons to pass over White in the search for an appointee; two votes of no confidence by his subordinates would be high on my list of reasons to look for someone more qualified.

Martinez must have seen this coming.
How could she have not seen it coming?

She did it anyway. Why?

She did it for the same reason a dog licks his balls,
because (s)he can.


Why does a Governor
deliberately create the
appearance of impropriety
without consequence?

because she can.

Why does a Governor
appointee a political crony
to a position of stature?

because she can.

She did it because she could.

And to hell with everyone who sees impropriety, conflicts of
interest and political cronyism. There's nothing they can do
about it, even if they wanted to.

Must we be hit in the head with a brick?




photos Mark Bralley

APS' DoIA and DoC don't have their stories straight

There is an inconsistency in the responses to my inquiry as to a list of all (non-financial) audits of the leadership of the APS in the last twelve years.

APS' Director of Communications
Rigo Chavez implies there is
no such thing;

"I don't know that the district
maintains lists of audits other than
those regarding fiscal audits."

At $75K a year, we're supposed
to believe; he just doesn't know.




APS Director of Internal Audits
Margret Koshmider's response
implies there is such a thing;

"I have started working on your request,..."







Problematic; the rest of her response;

"... but need to ask you to route it through
Rigo Chavez as it is a public records request."

It is not up to the person who fields a question, to decide whether it falls under the auspices of the NM Inspection of Public Records Act. It is up to the person who asks.

And, who in their right mind would want to engage all the loopholes, technicalities and "legal" weaselry the district will use to avoid responding candidly, forthrightly and honestly?

Witness their success in hiding the Caswell Report from public knowledge by playing games with the Act.

My question commands a response under higher standards of conduct than the law; which is but the lowest standard of conduct accepted by civilized human beings.

I responded to Koshmider as follows;

It is not a public records request unless I make it one, and I have not. I am simply asking for information.

Rigo Chavez has effectively denied the existence of any such list, so it will do little good to route the request through him anyway.

If there is someone else in your department that can handle this simple request, I have no need to further occupy you. I would be happy to correspond with anyone who will answer my legitimate questions candidly, forthrightly, and honestly.

grateful for your time and attention

Koshmider is the subject of a complaint filed with APS Ethical Advocate, link.

The leadership of the APS would like interest holders to believe that Ethical Advocate offers them an opportunity to file legitimate complaints against administrators and board members, and expect their complaint to see due process.

I file a legitimate complaint every once in a while,
and prove its not true.





photos Mark Bralley

Armenta stops wriggling, starts stonewalling

I am trying to get APS' Executive Director of Communications Monica Armenta (seen here instigating my unlawful ejection from the Gubernatorial Debate at EHS) to respond to a legitimate question candidly, forthrightly and honestly.

I have asked her to identify an audit of APS administrative standards and accountability which did not find;

1. inadequate standards, and or
2. inadequate accountability, and or
3. inadequate record keeping.

She responded, not by identifying a clean audit, but by trying to pass the request off to her underling APS Director of Communications Rigo Chavez. I responded with a number of good reasons why that solution was unworkable, link.

It has been five days, and still no response from Armenta who is being paid $107K a year to stonewall legitimate questions about the public interests.




photo Ched MacQuigg

APS doesn't compile audit results.

At 7:23 am on Tuesday, March 23, I emailed APS Director of Communications Rigo Chavez and asked him where I could find a list of (other than financial) audits done on the leadership of the APS.

I asked him to respond by email, rather than wasting tax dollars and time printing a letter and mailing it to me.

His response arrived yesterday via snail mail. Score one for Chavez' relentless need to obfuscate and delay the process, even at tax payer expense.

His response, "I don't know that the district maintains lists of audits other than those regarding finances."

There is a lot to be read into his response, like, there may be a list, but he doesn't know about it, and does feel like making any inquiries.

I will take it on its face; just like they don't keep a list of all of the vehicles in the APS Fleet Maintenance Division, link, APS doesn't keep track of old audits either.

That would explain why a recent audit revealed, the leadership of the APS does not pay any attention to audit findings; not enough anyway to cause them to change policies, rules or regulations in response.

Which begs a question; when is enough, enough?




photo Mark Bralley

UNM tuition hikes unjustifiable

They will remain unjustifiable for as long as there is any real
question over whether the administration is spending resources
effectively and efficiently.

Proof of that comes in the form of an independent and honest
audit of administrative effectiveness and efficiency.

Why is the COSO analysis and review undated?

Scour the final report, link. You will find no dates.
I haven't read the whole thing word for word, but I am comfortable reporting, you cannot find important dates in the usual places.

Nor can you find them by asking anyone in the leadership of the APS. They won't respond to the questions; when did it start, when did it end, and when did the School Board first see the results, in part or in whole?

Was it before they extended Supt Winston Brooks' contract and the cover up of the ethics and accountability scandal in the leadership of the APS? Is that what they're trying to hide?

Why, if Brooks' administration is corrupt and incompetent as the analysis and review suggest, did he get another $250K golden parachute? Why did he get it after the school board election and before any member- elect could participate in the behind closed doors shenanigans?

Why won't the establishment media investigate and report upon ethics and accountability in the leadership of the APS?

Why, except that they cannot report credibly on a scandal of long standing, without acknowledging their failure to investigate and report the scandal long, long ago.

By establishment media, I mean;
Editor Kent Walz and the Journal,
News Director Sue Stephens and KOAT TV,
News Director Julie Szulczewski and KOB TV, and
News Director Iain Munro and KRQE TV.

According to the COSO audit of the administration of the APS

There is;


"... no formalized process
for employees to provide
recommendations for
improvements."





Consider for a long moment, what that says about the respect
the leadership of the APS has, for the people who work under them.

"... there won't be a single APS senior administrator left standing."

When APS Police Chief Gil Lovato was put on paid administrative leave following the revelation of evidence of felony criminal misconduct by APS senior administrators, link, he said he was ready to go to court and when he was done "telling the truth","... there won't be a single APS senior administrator left standing."

Lovato really didn't want to go to court of course; he was complacent or complicit in the burial of every body he threatened to dig up. But the prospect of the truth coming out in court and in the public record, was more than APS Modrall could bear, so they just put him on leave for half a year to keep him quiet and out of court.

You might ask yourself, why is it that the leadership of the APS can't fire a senior administrator ever, without giving them a boot full of cash and paid leave?

It is because of what they will reveal in court. You don't get to be an APS senior administrator without knowing where more than a few bodies are buried.

If the truth in the Caswell Report is ever made public,
there won't be a single APS senior administrator left standing.
If there is justice, there won't be an incumbent school board member left sitting.

If the truth in the COSO Report is ever made public,
there won't be a single APS senior administrator or incumbent
board member left sitting. That, if they are held honestly
accountable for their complicity in, or complacency about,
the ethics and accountability scandal in the leadership of the APS.

If the leadership of the APS could furnish one public record that
substantially controverts anything I have written, they would.

They cannot furnish even one independent investigation of
administrative and executive standards and accountability,
that demonstrates the adequacy of either.

There is an ethics and accountability scandal in the leadership
of the APS.

If there is not, why can't they prove it with independent review?

It is time for a review and analysis of APS audits. I propose the audit cover the last 12 years; the time this year's seniors have been students in the APS.

I propose auditors look for evidence of recurring issues and failures to address audit findings with meaningful standards and accountability.

I propose that they publish their ethically redacted findings in the public record. And further, that their conclusions be written in plain English.

The only reason that anyone in the leadership of the APS would oppose such review, analysis, and publication, is to cover up public corruption and incompetence in the leadership of the APS.

The only reason the Journal, KRQE, KOAT, and KOB TV, are not investigating the cover up, is because they are (at least tacitly) part of it. My opinion, there complicity and complacency is way more than tacit.

Board ignored audit, extended Brooks' golden parachute anyway

The APS School Board recently gave APS Supt Winston Brooks his third contract extension, link. His contract now runs until 2014. It is a half million golden parachute.

If Brooks were a great superintendent, perhaps a golden parachute would be justified. He is not, and the golden parachute reeks of corruption.

The Board extended Brooks contract after two new school board were elected, but before they took their new seats on the board.

Following the dots, it appears they also extended Brooks' contract after they were appraised of the results of the latest audit of Brooks' administrative skill set; an audit that found significant administrative issues; a glaring lack of administrative standards and accountability.

Brooks wears two hats; he "leads" an educational effort and, he is the Chief Administrative Officer of a bureaucracy that spends more than a billion tax dollars per year. It is his failure as a CAO, proven by the audit, that would have led an honest school board to deny his contract extension from 2013 to 2014.

The Audit compared the administration of the APS to standards outlined by COSO; the Committee Of Sponsoring Organizations, link.

They claim to be

"... recognized the world over for providing guidance on critical aspects of organizational governance, business ethics, internal control, enterprise risk management, fraud, and financial reporting."

The PDF, link, is entitled;

COSO Review
Analysis and recommendations
FINAL Report

The analysis and review was done by Griego Professional Services LLC, link.

If it is as it appears, the school board extended Brooks' contract even though they were aware of significant findings of administrative incompetence and corruption. That action would make the board itself, incompetent or corrupt.

The Journal is aware of the COSO audit (I informed their reporter Hailey Heinz by email) and they have apparently chosen to ignore it.

Shame on Kent Walz and the Journal for their ongoing efforts
to help cover up the ethics and accountability scandal in the
leadership of the APS.




photo Mark Bralley

Armenta begins to wriggle

I have received a response to
my inquiry of APS Executive
Director of Communications
Monica Armenta.

I asked her to identify even
one single audit done in the
last hundred years, that found;

1. adequate standards, and
2. adequate accountability, and
3. adequate record keeping of the spending of public power and resources.

Armenta has responded;

Dear Mr. MacQuigg,
I understand Rigo Chavez has already responded to this request and has offered to speak with you should you have further questions.
Thank you,
Monica Armenta

I ask you;

if Rigo Chavez had ever shown me a clean audit, would I still be asking for it?

If Rigo Chavez had a clean audit to show me, wouldn't it be a lot easier to just name it than to go through this rigamarole?

If Rigo Chavez had ever admitted that the leadership of the APS hasn't had a clean audit in a hundred years, wouldn't I be showing you his admission?

I wrote back to Armenta;

You understand incorrectly.

Rigo Chavez has not already responded to this request. I am not sure who might have misinformed you, but to my best recollection, I have never sent this request to him, ever.

I really do not care to speak with him anyway, he steadfastly refuses to accommodate my disabilities and insists upon snail mailing every response, though I have asked him repeated for electronic responses and records.

I also do not believe I can enter spaces anywhere around your office without being harassed by the APS Police and apparently, being accused of "stalking" you.

In any case, I would rather an answer in writing in order that there be an incontrovertible record of was actually said.

Perhaps you could just go ahead and name the audit.
Will Rigo Chavez not tell you the name of the audit and when it was done?

Or you could just admit in writing, that the leadership of the APS has never in a hundred years, had an audit without findings of; inadequate standards and/or, inadequate accountability and/or, inadequate record keeping.

grateful for your time and attention

macq

which, as they say, puts the ball back in her court.
Though her hand off to Chavez could mean, she hasn't
the stomach for the game.




photo Mark Bralley

APS Whistle blower program tested

APS has a whistle blower program. It used to be called
Silent Whistle; it is now called Ethical Advocate.

Ethical Advocate is like Silent Whistle in that both are only
forwarding mailboxes. Neither offers any legitimacy to the
process except to strip the identity from complainants who
want to remain anonymous (out of fear of retribution and retaliation).

I have filed a complaint on the Ethical Advocate website; link.

I have alleged that two members of APS' Internal Audit Department deliberately misled an investigator from the New Mexico State Auditor's Office.

The investigator was there to determine whether the APS Audit Committee was indeed denying due process to more than 300 whistle blower complaints.

School Board Policy requires the Audit Committee to "review and approve" the administrative handling of every single whistle blower complaint.

To date, they haven't reviewed and approved of a single one.

One or both of the Internal Audit employees led the SAO investigator to believe that 317 individual complaints had seen the Audit Committee's review and approval.

In my complaint, I have demanded as resolution, that the truth be told to State Auditor Hector Balderas' Office; that due process is being denied to whistle blower complaints in blatant violation of APS School Board Policy.

The complaint against APS administrators will be adjudicated by APS administrators. A complaint against Supt Winston Brooks will be adjudicated by one of his subordinates. The remedy to the appearance of a impropriety; the obvious conflict of interest, is a promise from the executive branch, the school board, that they will review and approve the complaint; offering their personal guarantee that complaint was adjudicated free of administrative bias.

They won't actually do that of course, which is the whole point.

A response from the Internal Audit Department (the subjects of the complaint) was posted on the Ethical Advocate site the next day, it read;

Thank you for using Ethical Advocate.
Please allow 2 weeks (April 6, 2011) for a response.

OK, April 6th it is.

Brooks acknowledges Armenta complaint, or did he?

I emailed a complaint to APS Supt Winston Brooks.

I complained to him about the conduct and competence of APS' Executive Director of Communications Monica Armenta.

I allege(d) that she has failed to respond candidly, forthrightly and honestly to four legitimate questions about;

1. the hiding of the Caswell Report
2. the denial of due process to hundreds of whistle blower complaints
3. the abdication of the senior most role models of student standards of conduct, and
4. the avoidance of independent review of the administration of the APS

I filed the complaint on 3/9. Brooks (or somebody with access to his email account), finally used the return receipt function on the email on 3/16.

On 3/24, I received an email from Brooks email address;
it read;

Mr. MacQuigg, I have received your email.

The carefully worded response is telling. He maintains plausible deniability. If he found himself in a witness chair he can still claim that someone else must have sent the return receipt and the email "he received" could be any email I sent him ever.

Will my complaint against Armenta see due process?

Will any whistle blower complaints ever see due process?

Will Journal readers ever see an investigation and report upon credible, self-evident in fact, allegations of an ethics and accountability scandal in the leadership of the APS?

Will TV viewers KRQE, KOAT, and KOB TV ever watch a
report on the standards and accountability crisis in the leadership of the APS?

Monica Armenta gets paid $107K a year
to be Brooks' Six. Her only job is to make
the leadership of the APS look good.

Yesterday I asked her to point to a single
audit ever done, that indicated that there
are standards and accountability for APS
administrators and board members,
high enough, and certain enough,
to protect the public trust and treasure.


She has not.

She will not.

Because she can not.

APS administrators have had a hundred years to come up with honest accountability to meaningful standards of conduct and competence.

They have not.

They will not.

They will not, because it would take character and courage
that simply do not exist anywhere in the leadership of the APS.

Or at the Journal. Or at KRQE, KOAT, and KOB TV.

Or in Mayor Berry's Office, or in Governor Martinez' Office.




photo Mark Bralley

APS' Open Meetings Resolution

Once a year or when new board members take their seats, the board reviews and approves its open meetings policy.

More enlightened politicians and public servants are recognizing the need for adequate agenda posting, and are passing legislation requiring agendas to be posted three days before the meeting, and more.

The APS School Board's new policy; 24 hours; same as always.

The truth is they often don't publish agendas and minutes in accordance with the Open Meetings Act. You would have to sue them before they would even acknowledge their failures.

Though it is their long past practice to post agendas on their website; their new policy doesn't really require them to. Once you follow all the "or"s, opposed to "and or"s, all they really have to do is tape it underneath a desk drawer somewhere in their castle keep at 6400 Upyours Blvd.

Take the time to read it, link. You will find a huge disconnect
the transparency they award each other for, and the transparency that they actually provide.

Open Government Lawyer, Dixon "hero of transparency" Award winner, NM Foundation for Open Government Board of Directors Member Marty Esquivel has apparently failed to overcome the opposition on the Board to offer interest holders any improved transparency.

The vote will be test for the new Board Members Kathy Korte and Analee Maestas.

With their votes, they will pick a side in the fight over any real transparent accountability in the leadership of the APS.

I wonder if they know that. I'll tell them. They were cc'd
upon posting. Their mettle is to be tested.

They will vote at a Special Board Meeting at 7:30 in the morning,
the agenda was published today; expect public attendance to be light. I would go, but Marty Esquivel says he will arrest me,
if I don't first kiss his ring.

Right, like that's ever going to happen.

Open inquiry sent to Monica Armenta

I have made an inquiry of APS Executive Director of Communications Monica Armenta.

I sent it via email, return receipt requested.

Ms Armenta,

This inquiry comes addressed to you because it is my impression that, that is your manifest preference.

If it is not, please advise me of such and, forward this inquiry to the appropriate office.

I would like you to identify every audit or investigation of any aspect of the administration of the Albuquerque Public Schools, done in the last 12 years, and that meets the following criteria;

Auditors found all of the following;

1. adequate standards (regulations, policies, procedures and directives)
2. adequate accountability to those standards, and
3. adequate record keeping.

Again, the identity of all audits whose findings include all three.

If it is your intention to argue that the number of such audits makes my request excessive and burdensome, I will amend my request to include only the identity of one; the most recent.

Grateful as always, for your time and attention

Charles MacQuigg

photo Mark Bralley

Armenta acknowledged receipt at 10:18 am.

Marty Esquivel shows his cowardice and his lack of character

I am one of School Board Member Marty Esquivel's constituents.

I have standing to ask him legitimate questions about the public interests in the APS and about his public service on the School Board.

In the past, he has had me arrested for asking legitimate questions, link.

I am the subject of a completely unlawful restraining order,
written by Esquivel, signed off on by Paula Maes, and
enforced by APS' Praetorian Guard Commander Steve Tellez, link.

Never the less, I took the opportunity to ask him a question.

I asked Esquivel to respond to a legitimate question about due process for whistle blower complaints. According to school board policy, the Audit Committee has an obligation to provide a final review of whistle blower complaints;

"School Board Policy B.07D; The Audit Committee
reviews and recommends approval of ... any
whistleblower complaints ..."

School board policy requires the review and approval of every whistle blower complaint and to date, they have not reviewed even one; and certainly neither of mine.

So my question to Esquivel was legitimate;

Now that you are the Chair of the Audit Committee,
will you respond candidly, forthrightly and honestly
about the Audit Committee's ongoing failure to provide
due process to more than 300 whistle blower complaints
already filed; not one of which has seen the audit
committee's review and approval of any whistle
blower complaints, as promised in school board policy?

If not why not?

His responses came to a total of 265 words. Though I have only pointed to Esquivel's public service, his response amounted to nothing more than an abusive personal attack. He called me;

• A personal and professional failure,
• obsessed,
• a crybaby,
• unhealthy,
• unproductive,
• a gadfly,
• a critic,
• a liar,
  
• gutless,
• lacking integrity, and
• misleading

In the past, he has labeled me a "nut case".

Let's assume for the sake of discussion, that I am; a personal and professional failure, obsessed, a crybaby, unhealthy, unproductive, a gadfly, a critic, a liar, gutless, lacking integrity, misleading, and a nut case. So what?

Does that make the question any less legitimate?

Does it make his obligation to respond candidly, forthrightly, and honestly to any legitimate question about the public interests or about his public service, any less binding?

Questions are either legitimate or not on their face.
It makes no difference who asks them or why.

Esquivel has an obligation to respond to any legitimate
question, no matter who asks it or why.

If you as him to point to a time, a day, and a place where he will stand and deliver candid, forthright and honest responses to legitimate questions about the public interests and/or his public service, he will not.

He cannot summon the character and the courage.



He is a punk, if ever there was one.

He prevails in no small part because Kent Walz and the
Journal, Sue Stephens and KOAT, Julie Szulczewski and KOB TV, and Iain Munro and KRQE TV will not investigate and report upon an ongoing conspiracy to deny due process to more than three hundred whistle blower complaints filed against the leadership of the APS.

They steadfastly refuse to investigate and report upon ethics and accountability scandal in the leadership of the APS.




photo Mark Bralley


I updated this post at 12:26 pm. I will remind old readers and inform new, I regard all of my posts as works in progress, and if ever I have an opportunity to improve a post, I do. I hold myself accountable of course, for every version I have ever published.

APS, is another audit the answer?

Though a long time advocate of an independent district wide audit of APS' leadership and managerial skills, I have come around to a different way of thinking. Perhaps there have been audits enough, and the real problem is that the leadership of the APS ignores findings (which is itself a recurrent audit finding).

Consider the latest audit of APS' leadership and management practices, link. It is as damning as it could possibly be; what more proof could anyone need of the ongoing incompetence (corruption) in the leadership of the APS?

The solution; an audit review; hire an independent audit team to examine the findings of every audit done in the last 12 years (the time this year's senior class has been denied a first class education due to administrative short comings).

Auditors must report directly to the public not to administrators and board members who have a need to hide their own incompetence and corruption. The auditors will report to interest holders, upon recurring findings and the administrative failure to address them.

This audit review would be relatively inexpensive as the facts have been gathered already. It could also be completed within a very short time frame.

The only thing missing; the character and the courage necessary to begin the disclosure.

Another APS audit, same findings

Another audit has been performed on the Albuquerque Public Schools. The audit was done by Griego Professional Services late last year and reported to APS in January. The audit concerned itself with internal controls.

I cannot find a copy of the audit on APS' website and for good reason; the audit reveals the same problems APS has always had and continues to fail to address; (The list is not comprehensive, I stopped reading about halfway through realizing my argument is made. The following points are pretty much verbatim, emphasis is added)

1. the absence of a periodically acknowledged code of conduct
2. the absence of HR processes to address nepotism conflicts of interest
3. apparent lack of accountability for the protection of district assets
4. a lack of process to notify the State Auditor of the discovery of any violation of a criminal statute in connection with financial affairs
5. lack of background checks on those in fiduciary positions
6. a lack of communication of management responses to conduct/ethical lapses
7. the Districts practices and processes are reactive in nature (v proactive)
8. board policy and procedural directives are outdated and inconsistently written
9. employee standards of conduct are sparsely worded; due care of District property is not stated
10. no code of conduct is formally acknowledged (not since the leadership abandoned its obligations as role models of the Pillars of Character Counts!)
11. the whistle blower program is highly utilized (but due process is still being denied to every single one of the complaints)
12. management culture shows varying emphasis on integrity and ethics
13. no formal metric for measuring management responses to problems
14. District management's approach to allegations of nepotism, cronyism and protection of property needs improvement
15. it is unclear whether the District has reported to the State Auditor discoveries of cash fraud and property losses, or that they intend to rectify this finding in the future
16. a perception that management is ineffective or ambivalent about enforcing standards of conduct, and enforces rules inconsistently
17. the school board is not focused on evaluating the effectiveness of "the tone at the top" (yet they have extended Winston Brooks contract three times, three years into the future)
18. the district does not publish a code of conduct
19. significant turnover in the Chief Financial Officer position (the district argued "individual circumstances" for turnover; the record indicates otherwise)
20. District assets are not protected from unauthorized access or use
21. the District doesn't benchmark supervisory ratios
22. overtime for managers is not tracked
23. specific delegations of authority are not defined
24. individuals hired for similar positions with similar education receive widely different compensation
25. there is no management-related training program
26. no systematic confirmation that required performance reviews are actually done
27. it is unclear whether specific promotion criteria are documented or understood (the Council of the Great City Schools auditors wrote; administrative evaluations are subjective and unrelated to promotion or step placement)
28. promotion criteria do not include adherence to behavioral standards
29. HR policy does not require scrutiny of job candidates with frequent job changes or gaps in employment history
30. there is no stated policy requiring employees to report criminal convictions
31. credit checks are not done on employees with fiduciary responsibilities who handle cash
32. activity level objectives are not periodically reviewed for continued relevance
33. a lack of specific performance objectives in activity areas
34. there are no formal processes for periodic risk assessment or root cause analysis of recurring issues
35. I. T. back up plans are not periodically tested
36. formal identification of risks at the activity-level have not been performed
37. information on the function of internal controls has not been developed
38. APS does not maintain an Ombudsman function
39. no formalized process for employees to provide recommendations for improvements
40. suppliers, customers and others are not made aware of District standards and expectations
41. such standards are not reinforced in routine dealings
42. improprieties are not reported to appropriate personnel
43. no documentation of closure of complaints made to the Service Center or to the Superintendent
44. no clear metrics showing top management is aware of the volume or nature of complaints
45. formal monitoring of internal controls needs improvement
46. personnel are not periodically required to acknowledge compliance with the code of conduct
47. the Internal Audit Department is understaffed and therefore consumed with property issues and activity accounts at the expense of systematic issues of risk.
48. the District does not conduct formal self-assessments of control processes
49. no evidence of a single process or clearinghouse for tracking issues and corrective actions

The entire audit can be viewed here, link.

Though I haven't the expertise to evaluate all of these findings, it seems pretty clear that there is a lack of standards and accountability in the leadership of the APS and that little progress is being made in remediation of the problems.

The lack of progress is due, in my opinion, to the fact that the leadership of the APS are a bunch of good ol' boys, more interested in covering each others asses than in holding each other honestly accountable to any meaningful standards of conduct and competence.

Open letter to APS Audit Committee Chair Marty Esquivel

Mr Esquivel,

Now that you are the Chair
of the Audit Committee,
will you respond candidly,
forthrightly and honestly
about the Audit Committee's
ongoing failure to provide
due process to more than
300 whistle blower
complaints already filed;
not one of which has seen
the audit committee's review and approval of any whistle blower complaints, as promised in school board policy?

If not why not?




photo Mark Bralley

Did Brooks and Esquivel threaten Gov Martinez? With what?

Governor Susana Martinez has
an abundant record of criticism
of waste in the APS. It was she
who pointed repeatedly to the
administrative bloat in the APS,
in particular, the waste in APS'
Communications Department.

Then she, APS Supt Winston Brooks,
and then School Board President
Marty Esquivel, met in secret from
stakeholders, link, and since, not a
peep from the Governor about the
ongoing waste, link, in the leadership of the APS.

So what did Brooks and Esquivel say to Martinez to get her to back off her legitimate criticism of administrative bloat, incompetence, and corruption in the leadership of the APS?

Likely, we will never know; Martinez does not respond to questions left on her "Contact the Governor"website, link.




photo Mark Bralley

As a "political subdivision", APS is covered under the new Governmental Conduct Act.

Assuming Governor Susana Martinez signs the bill, Senate Bill 432, carried by Senator Tim Eichenberg, will expand the coverage of the Governmental Conduct Act to include all political subdivisions, including school boards.

Assuming the Bill is signed, Article 10-16-3 Ethical Principles of Public Service, will apply to the APS Board of Education and a criminal complaint can be filed on July 1st, regarding their ongoing violation of Article 10-16-3-B.

(School Board Members) shall conduct themselves in a manner that justifies the confidence placed in them by the people, at all times maintaining the integrity and discharging ethically the high responsibilities of public service.

It is the "discharging ethically" where the APS School Board is in violation of the law. Their ongoing refusal to hold themselves honestly accountable as role models of accountability to a code of ethics, is prima facie, an unethical discharge of their duties as role models of the APS Student Standards of Conduct; the Pillars of Character Counts!, link; a nationally recognized, accepted and respected code of ethical conduct.

APS and Modrall will spend freely from increasingly scarce operational funds to litigate an escape from the consequences of their ongoing criminal misconduct. Or, business as usual.

Now all I have to do is find a prosecutor who is willing to prosecute any of the good ol' boys that run the APS.

Bernalillo County District Attorney Kari Brandenburg is likely of no use, as she won't even do anything about the fact that the leadership of the APS is hiding evidence of felony criminal misconduct involving senior administrators and the APS Police Department, and has been for more than four years.




photo Mark Bralley