aps superintendent beth everitt

stop stonewalling.

you have been asked questions. you have had more than enough time to respond.

at the board meeting tomorrow; the agenda provides an opportunity for the superintendent to speak on matters of information.

as a matter of information to stakeholders;

• when will you complete the investigation of public corruption in the administration of your police force? do you intend to surrender the public record of the investigation? or defend your refusal to do so?
• will you commission a forensic audit of the uptown administrative complex? or defend your refusal to do so?
• why are you no longer accountable as a role model, to the student standard of conduct?
• when will you begin an impartial audit of your administration; one that is beyond your influence. or defend your refusal to do so?

to the extent that I am able, I insist that you answer these questions in the manner in which you expect students to answer questions.

according to the student standard of conduct, the pillars of character counts;

Honesty in communications is expressing the truth as best we know it and not conveying it in a way likely to mislead or deceive. There are three dimensions:

Truthfulness. Truthfulness is presenting the facts to the best of our knowledge. Intent is the crucial distinction between truthfulness and truth itself. Being wrong is not the same thing as lying, although honest mistakes can still damage trust insofar as they may show sloppy judgment.

Sincerity. Sincerity is genuineness, being without trickery or duplicity. It precludes all acts, including half-truths, out-of-context statements, and even silence, that are intended to create beliefs or leave impressions that are untrue or misleading.

Candor. 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.

for their part, paula maes/modral et al, will not allow these questions to be asked in person and on the record during the public forum at board meetings.

their conduct in this respect is as indefensible as it is reprehensible.


(a link to this post was sent to everitt at her aps emailbox at approx 10am today, it was sent to individual boardmembers by means of the board manager's emailbox offering them an opportunity to rebut by means of a comment on this post
for what ever good it will do, I will cc casaus and moore, who are apparently stonewalling their ownership in any of this)