APS' Drop out summit no help.

Crazy, they say, is doing the same thing over and over again,
and expecting a different result.

This was not the first blue ribbon committee, summit,
task force, or hootenanny on drop outs. It won't be the last.

Does anyone seriously suppose that if you get highly dedicated
and intelligent people together to brainstorm an issue,
and then you get another group to do the same thing, that
they are going to come to substantially different conclusions?

A successful drop out summit would have come to the conclusion
that the public school education model is fundamentally flawed;
fatally flawed.

At the end of the day, we are still trying to herd kittens
in five rows of six, in the exactly the same direction, and at the
exactly the same speed, for 12 years.

It isn't working. It cannot be made to work.
Even if you could make it work, why would you want to?
Why would you want to solve a problem with the solution
which is the most difficult to implement?

Why not teach children to be independent learners
by offering them whatever it is that they want to learn,
whenever they want to learn it, and by the most effective
means?

What ever else it has done, the No Child Left Behind Act,
has sucked the fun out of learning. There are very few kids
who actually enjoy studying for standardized tests.

There is no such thing as a disengaged learner.

Engaging students is the top priority. It is fundamental.
It is foundational. It is essential.

We can let these kittens follow their noses, and learn how to
learn with enthusiasm and excitement.

Engaged learners do not drop out.

They are not chronically disruptive.
They don't come to class late.
They don't tear their schools apart.
They don't keep other kids from learning.
They don't drive good teachers out of teaching.

NCLB standards and student interests are utterly unrelated.

One engages kids, the other drives a full half of them
out of school before they graduate.

According to the Journal article, no link, one conclusion
drawn at the summit, was that "teaching employment skills"
was necessary. "Teaching employment skills", runs into exactly
the same obstacle as "teaching them what they want to learn";
the NCLB prohibits it.

This was the question that I
had asked mayoral hopeful,
Marty Chavez.

I asked him if we could offer
kids something beside test
prep for the NCLB.

He said "Absolutely".


Which is absolute bullshit. It can't be done. The bureaucrats
that wrote and enforce the NCLB will not allow it.

It will have to be funded outside of the budget. Entirely new
money will have to come from somewhere.

Marty Chavez, "absolutely" needs to show us the money
that he will use to offer kids an non-NCLB compliant
curriculum. Talk is cheap. Education isn't.

And if he can't show us the money, and he can't, because
Chavez has made a campaign promise that he can't keep,
then the onus is back upon us.

What are we going to do about the NCLB, and what are we
going to do about the harm that it is doing to our children?




photo Mark Bralley

David Peercy had a few questions at the Audit Committee meeting.

APS' Director of Internal Audit,
Margret Koshmider had just finished
relating SilentWhistle statistics to the
audit committee.


The statistics that she shared were
comparatively worthless, and there
were legitimate questions left unanswered.




Peercy's questions were legitimate.
For example;

given that 15 man hours are spent
on the average SilentWhistle
complaint, what is the gravity of
the allegations that are being
investigated?

Or, is SilentWhistle worth the
investment?

The problem is;

if the Audit Committee was actually doing the review and
approval of SilentWhistle complaints required by school
board policy, he would already know the answer to his question.
He would have known the answer because he would have
reviewed and approved of each and every SilentWhistle
complaint.

The reason he doesn't know anything about the average
SilentWhistle complaint is; there has not been a review and
approval of even a single complaint.

Not one.

The school board is the community's oversight over the
administration of the APS. If the board refuses to engage
in that oversight, the community is defenseless against
administrative corruption and incompetence.

They are now more than 150 complaints behind.

More than 150 complaints have been denied due process
in order that two complaints never see the light of day.

One complaint alleges that when
Winston Brooks refuses to hold himself honestly accountable
to the Pillars of Character Counts!,
that refusal constitutes ethical misconduct.

When that complaint was denied due process by
Director of Internal Audit, Margret Koshmider,
another complaint alleging ethical misconduct, was filed
against her as well.

Rather than afford these two complaints the review and
approval that they deserve, the Audit Committee has
decided to deny due process to all SilentWhistle complaints.

The only response to the legitimate question about the
prospects of due process for more that 150 SilentWhistle
complaints, is;

Although APS School Board Policy specifically and
expressly charges the Audit Committee with the
"review and approval" of SilentWhistle complaints,

the "law" doesn't. And,

the law "trumps" school board policy.

Or, "you can't make us."


Another little tidbit that came out in the meeting, was an
explanation of why each complaint takes so long to resolve.

The reason is, when an allegation is made, it is forwarded
to the administrator most responsible for having allowed
whatever misconduct, to take place in the first place.
It is forwarded to the administrator under whose supervision
the offensive conduct occurred.

And they are not getting back to Koshmider within the
allotted time. Apparently, she has to keep asking over and
over again.

Koshmider related a story about paperwork that was so long
overdue that she had to ask Brad Winter to intervene
personally.


Depend on Board member
Lorenzo Garcia to ask the
right questions.


He asked if there were penalties
attached to chronic tardiness
in the return of this paperwork;
for example,
letters of reprimand, etc.



The short answer was no.



These are after all, good ol' boys that we are talking about.



photos Mark Bralley

Winston Brooks tired of hearing; "Well, this is New Mexico"

According to an article in the New Mexico Business Weekly,
link, Winston Brooks acknowledges a culture that needs to
change; the culture of low expectations regarding public service,
the schools in particular.

"Brooks said he has heard a certain phrase far too many
times since taking the superintendent’s job in July 2008:
“‘Well, this is New Mexico.’”

“It’s almost said in a spirit of ‘Don’t expect all that much,’”
he said. “That’s a culture that ought to change.”"

According to the article,
Brooks said, the perception of APS
"often overshadows the reality."

The perception is that there is
a lack of standards and accountability
in the leadership of the APS.





Governor Bill Richardson said, APS has a statewide earned
reputation for its lack of accountability.

Mayor Marty Chavez argued that the lack of standards and
accountability in the leadership of the APS warranted mayoral
appointments of school board members.

Current School Board President Marty Esquivel
pointed to real concerns that warranted the involvement of
the Bernalillo County District Attorney's Office. link.

There has never been an audit of APS standards and
accountability that did not reveal a significant lack of both.

The last time the Council of the Great City Schools audited,
(the APS Police Department) they wrote that the leadership
of the APS had a history of not correcting issues identified
in previous audits.

Almost two years later, the Meyners Audit revealed a lack
standards and accountability in the APS Finance Division
that APS Board Member Robert Lucero described as a
crisis in leadership.

The perception is that
APS lacks standards, accountability, and the will to change.

They reality is that
they steadfastly refuse to allow an impartial standards and
accountability audit. Paula Maes said that she would
"never agree" to any audit that named the names of the
corrupt and the incompetent in the leadership of the APS.


In this case, the perception does not overshadow the reality
at all; it is spot on.

And that's a culture that ought to change.



photo Mark Bralley

Jon Barela for congress

When Jon Barela was on the APS School Board, he had
the opportunity to be the first person in the entire history of
the APS to step up to honest accountability as a role model of
the APS Student Standards of Conduct.

He did not. link
At his moment of truth, he chose not to.

He had another moment of truth when he had the opportunity
to step up to a legitimate complaint of ethical misconduct.

He did not. link

We are fortunate in our lives, to get one real honest to God
moment of truth; one chance to really test our mettle.
That's why it is so important not to blow it.

Jon Barela had two moments of truth and blew them both.
He is fortunate, because he gets yet another run at it.

He could be the first politician to promise to institutionalize
transparent accountability in government.

He has an opportunity to be the first to step up and promise
to end the culture of corruption in government and politics,
by institutionalizing transparent accountability to meaningful
standards of conduct and competence for politicians and
public servants.


It's only fair to cite one last example of Jon Barela's character.

He and I had had an ongoing dispute over whether or not
I had copied him, on posts that I had written about him.

I maintained that I had, he that I hadn't.

Months later, I got a phone call from Jon Barela.
He called to tell me that he had been cleaning out old email
accounts, and had found the emails in question.

That showed an extraordinary amount of character, imho.


Most men never have
a moment of truth.

Most never really know
what they would do
when the chips were down.

This guy gets three. It is likely
there will not be a fourth.

Don't blow it, Jon Barela.




photo Mark Bralley

The Role Modeling Clause has been on the table for more than two months.

It has been more than two months since APS Board
Member, David Robbins put the role modeling clause
on the table for and open and honest public discussion.

In no case shall the standard of conduct for an adult,
be lower than the standards of conduct for students.

It has not been discussed since, because the leadership of the
APS has no intention of being held honestly accountable to
as high a standard as the Pillars of Character Counts!.

Yet, even they would agree that adult standards of conduct,
at least in education, must include a role modeling clause.

The only solution that would be acceptable to the leadership
of the APS would be to lower the student standards of conduct
to a point that the leadership of the APS would feel comfortable
being held honestly accountable to them.

So what lower standard of conduct could they select?

Perhaps they would be comfortable being held accountable
to five of the six Pillars. We could even let them select the
Pillar that they will leave out. It will be the Pillar of
Trustworthiness, because that is the Pillar that prohibits
them from hiding the truth from stakeholders.

The simple truth is that even five Pillars,
is five Pillars too many.

Their record is one of excepting themselves from accountability
even to the law; the lowest standard of acceptable conduct.

There is no standard of conduct low enough, that the leadership
of the APS will step up as role models.

If there were, they would point to it.
They would discuss it openly and honestly.

They won't, because their isn't.
So instead, they will continue the coward's lie;
stonewalling.

I went to the Audit Committee for two reasons.

I wanted to see what they were wanting to do in secret, and
because I wanted to hear the report on SilentWhistle.

I understand, and agree, that there are some things that should
not be made public. These "things" show up in an inclusive list
that is part of the Open Meetings Act. The list does not include
"things" that make the District look bad.

There is a huge difference between what the law requires to
remain secret, and what the APS keeps secret. The leadership
of the APS routinely redacts the truth far in excess of the
requirements of the law; for no reason except to deliberately
mislead stakeholders.

On the subject of APS SilentWhistle, APS Director of
Internal Audit, Margret Koshmider reported that the
number of complaints filed with APS whistleblower protection
program now total more than 150.

According to APS School Board Policy, link, the final step in
the due process that is afforded to complaints, is an individual
review and approval of the handling of each complaint. Board
Policy reads, in significant part, The Audit Committee is
charged with;

review and recommend approval or action(s) associated
with ... any whistleblower complaints.

Audit Committee Chair, David Robbins
steadfastly refuses to place the review
and approval of whistleblower complaints
on the committee's agenda.

There are now more than 150 complaints
that are being denied due process.


Why?


The short answer is that; David Robbins does not want to allow any public discussion of two complaints in particular; one alleging ethical misconduct by Winston Brooks related to his ongoing refusal to step up as a role model of the Pillars of Character Counts!. The other is a complaint against Margret Koshmider, alleging that she closed the complaint against Winston Brooks without giving the complaint its due process.

Neither complaint will be heard in public, because the district wants to avoid the public embarrassment of admitting that they have no real intention of being held accountable as role models of the APS Student Standards of Conduct.

The effort to deny these two complaints, their due process, is the real reason that more than 150 other complaints will not see due process either.

I have emailed David Robbins three times to ask him to tell the truth about his intentions regarding the review and approval of whistleblower complaints. The review and approval is specifically and expressly required by board policy.

The nearest thing that I have gotten to an answer is

"There are Federal regulations and laws which supersede
all Board Policies.

So in not having a public hearing, APS complies with
the law, but maybe not policy.

Given Federal law and regulations trump Board policy,
I believe APS has acted correctly."

If the law read that there will be no review and approval,
then there would be a conflict between board policy and the
law, and the law would trump board policy.

The truth is that there is no conflict. The law does not
mention review and approval at all.

At best, the law "allows" the board to ignore its own policy,
for even the most indefensible reasons.

Robbins' effort to take advantage of the circumstances is
in diametric opposition to APS Student Standards of Conduct,
under which students are taught that;

"Being a person of character, often requires doing
more than the law requires, and
less than the law allows."

David Robbins, on the other hand, seeks to do all that the law
allows, including denying due process to legitimate complaints,
simply to avoid telling the truth to stakeholders.

David Robbins cannot summon the character and the courage
to do the right thing, even as one of the seven most senior
role models of the Student Standards of Conduct; the
Pillars of Character Counts!

The example that he is setting for students and staff is
dishonest, it is unethical, and it is disgraceful.

cc David Robbins upon posting.




photo Mark Bralley

New Mexico, a model for transparent accountability in government.

It could happen.

An era of transparency and accountability could replace
the current culture of corruption.

New Mexico state government could be as transparent as
technology and common sense will allow.

Instead of being a national laughingstock;
we could be the state that other states look to,
to see how its done right.

The question is not; can it be done? The question is;
will it be done?

The real owners of the power and resources agree.
They want the culture of corruption to end.
They want transparent accountability to meaningful standards
of conduct and competence. They want open government.


The culture of corruption has prevailed only because we have
allowed it to.

It will continue to prevail, only for as long as we allow it to.

Let's have a fight.

On one side,
those for transparency and accountability limited only by
technology and common sense.

And on the other side,
those in favor of a continuing culture of corruption.


Let's have a fight.

Say what?

According to a KOB TV report, Winston Brooks said;

"I'm just telling you, we do know what we're doing or
we wouldn't have found it and we wouldn't be reporting it
now and being as open as we are about it."

The claims bear a little scrutiny.

"We know what we're doing or we wouldn't have
found it ..."

No, if you knew what you're doing,
you wouldn't have lost it.

If you knew what you're doing,
it wouldn't have taken ten years to find a $16M error.

And,

"... we wouldn't be reporting it now and being as open as
we are about it."

Who is kidding whom? If it could have been hidden,
it would have been hidden.

If Winston Brooks refuses to answer a simple and legitimate
question like;

Did Meyners auditors find criminal misconduct
during their audit of the APS Finance Division?

how can he lay any claim at all to being "open"?

Isn't this a little like getting caught stealing, and then claiming
not to be a thief because when you got caught, you gave the
money back?

Monica Armenta isn't the only one spinning the truth at APS.

Felony criminal misconduct?

APS is involved in more questionable dealing with vendors.
link

In a scandal reminiscent of the Inn of the Mountain Gods
APS vendor sponsored soiree, link, vendors are apparently
again influencing purchasing decision making by offering
favors to APS employees.

APS news conferences are "private" affairs

At nine thirty yesterday morning, I sent the following email
to APS Director of Communications, Rigo Chavez.

Mr. Chavez,

Per our conversation;
Please add my name to the list of people who are
contacted with regard to news conferences.

Please confirm that you have accommodated this request.

gfytaa

ched macquigg

This email was "necessary" because when I stood face to face
with him, a few days before, he would not simply take my
request, insisting instead, that I had to make a request in writing.

Never the less, I was not notified of yesterday's news
conference where Winston Brooks revealed that APS had
lost and "found" $16M.

This follows by about a week or so, APS throwing the free press,
me, out of a news conference because I am not the "press". link

I am the press, of course. The rights protected by the
First Amendment, do not depend on Monica Armenta's
personal approval. Nor are they contingent upon the approval
of anyone else in the leadership of the APS.

APS is denying the opportunity to exercise First Amendment
rights in order to control the "spin" on the truth.

Shame on them.

APS "finds" $16M

Or, APS "lost" $16M, and it finally turned up again, depending
on your perspective. The view from the Journal is, it's a "find"
link

""I am quite frankly embarrassed on behalf of the district,"
Superintendent Winston Brooks said in a Tuesday
afternoon news conference."

The District, according to the paper, said the error that created
the situation could have occurred as long ago as 2002, and
remained undiscovered for seven years.

The discrepancy was first discovered a year ago, but not made
public until now. It has taken APS the intervening year, to find
the missing money.

State Education Secretary Veronica Garcia, offered an
excuse for the APS, positing;

"... it appears that turnover among APS staff led to the error. "

Yeah, either that or, a lack of standards and accountability lie at
the heart of the problem.

As recently as March, 2008, an independent audit of APS'
Finance Division revealed;

• a lack of and enforcement of financially sound policies and procedures,
• insufficient training and staffing,
• inadequate financial reporting, and
• poor implementation of financial management software.

These finding reveal problems greater than "turnover" among
the staff.

When asked if these auditors found criminal misconduct in
the APS Finance Division, APS refuses to answer the question.
Which leads me to believe that they will be covering up any
criminal misconduct in the APS Finance Division, the same
as they did with the felony criminal misconduct in the APS
Peanut Butter Gate scandal in their Police Department.

The cover up will continue until statutes of limitation have expired,
and senior APS administrators can no longer be held accountable
for even felony criminal misconduct.

APS steadfastly refuses to even discuss the idea of an impartial
standards and accountability audit, because such an audit would
illuminate the seriousness of the widespread and deeply rooted
culture in the leadership of the APS that enables the lack of
standards and accountability to remain unaddressed and
unmitigated.

The M.O. of the leadership of the APS is to try to fix problems
without ever admitting that there are problems. An impartial
standards and accountability audit would reveal all of their
problems once and for all.

The revelation would make the problems easier to correct,
but then individual administrators would be held accountable
for their conduct and competence; an outcome that the
leadership of the APS will never allow.

School Board head honcho Paula Maes, stated publicly
that she would never allow any audit that would name the
names of incompetent and/or corrupt APS administrators.
link

The problems will be addressed, maybe, but those responsible
for the problems will never be named, nor held accountable
for their (in)actions.

Is the upcoming APS Audit Committee Meeting even legal?

APS Audit Committee is set to have another one of their
little secret meetings. link
I am always reminded that "secret" is the wrong word to use
in this context. The meeting is actually a "closed" meeting.

By my reasoning; the reason that the meeting is closed is;
to keep secrets about what they're doing, ergo,
it's a "secret" meeting.

They are required by the law to tell the truth about why they
will meet in secret. They are required by the law to tell the
truth with "reasonable specificity".

According to the Open Meetings Act, Compliance Guide, link,

"The subject announced will comply with the
“reasonable specificity” requirement if it provides
sufficient information to give the public a general idea
about what will be discussed without compromising
the confidentiality conferred by the exception.
(emphasis added)

For example, a motion might be stated: “I move that the
commission convene in closed session as authorized by
the limited personnel matters exception to discuss
possible disciplinary action against an employee.”"

APS' idea of "reasonable specificity" about their need to meet
in secret;

" ...for the purpose of discussing limited personnel matters
in connection with Internal Audit.

It's like saying they're meeting in secret because; the law says
they can.

According to the law itself, "limited personnel matters" means;

"... the discussion of hiring, promotion, demotion,
dismissal, assignment or resignation of or the
investigation or consideration of complaints or charges
against any individual public employee;

Yet, according to APS School Board Policy, link ,
the Audit Committee meets only to;

"... review and recommend approval or action(s)
associated with the District’s Annual Audit,
any internal audit(s), audits associated with the
Capital Outlay and Technology, and
any employee whistleblower complaints.

The APS Audit Committee has no business meeting to discuss
"limited personal matters" at all, much less, in secret.

This is not the first time the Audit Committee has gone
into secret over "limited personnel matters" link

Nor is this the last time, I willing to bet,
that the Audit Committee will meet in secret from
stakeholders, and from their right to know the truth.

Update; the agenda has been changed, and now reveals a
more appropriate amount of detail.

Adjourn to Executive Session pursuant to (§ 10-15-1 (H) (2)) for
the purpose of discussing limited personnel matters in connection with
Internal Audit; nine non-compliant/partial activity fund audits,
one administrative process audit, seven investigations/reports.

The Pillar of Trustworthiness.

We have no choice in the matter, except to entrust control
over our power and our resources, to public servants.

It is reasonable to expect them to be trust worthy.
And to prove it.

Proof is as simple as providing honest accountability to some
agreed upon standard for trustworthiness.

The standard that is held up for millions of children in public
schools is the Pillar of Trustworthiness; found on the
national Character Counts! website. link (emphasis added)

TRUSTWORTHINESS

When others trust us, they give us greater leeway because they feel we don’t need monitoring to assure that we’ll meet our obligations. They believe in us and hold us in higher esteem. That’s satisfying. At the same time, we must constantly live up to the expectations of others and refrain from even small lies or self-serving behavior that can quickly destroy our relationships.

Simply refraining from deception is not enough. Trustworthiness is the most complicated of the six core ethical values and concerns a variety of qualities like honesty, integrity, reliability and loyalty.

Honesty

There is no more fundamental ethical value than honesty. We associate honesty with people of honor, and we admire and rely on those who are honest. But honesty is a broader concept than many may realize. It involves both communications and conduct.

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.

Imagine how different government would be, if public servants
were actually accountable to a standard as high as the one they
hold up for children.

Every generation expects the next generation,
to be the first generation to hold itself honestly accountable
to meaningful standards of conduct and competence.

The results are as disappointing as they are inevitable.

Open government costs taxpayers double.

From a Journal editorial this morning, link, we glean the
following;

Farmington, NM, needed a new city manager. A number of
people applied for the job.

The Farmington Daily News link, asked for the names of the
applicants, and the request was denied.

Though exceptions to the law are clear, and this clearly isn't,
the mayor and two city councilors argued;

If elected officials have to share information about
applicants with the voters who elected them, ...,

"you're going to get watered-down applicant pools of
people that are ... not necessarily the best candidate."

Or, in other words, the best candidates lie within a pool of
candidates who are unwilling to be honest with their
current employers, about their future intentions.

It took an appeals court decision to change their minds.
The final cost to taxpayers, who will end up paying for the
lawyers for both sides, will approach a quarter of a million
dollars.

Consequences for the public servants who wasted a quarter
of a million dollars in a effort to hide the truth from taxpayers;
nothing.

There is no consequence for public servants who make
deliberate efforts to hide the truth from stakeholders.

There is no reason for them to change anything about the
manner in which they respond to legitimate requests for
public records.

It is time to provide meaningful personal penalties for public
servants who choose not to comply with legitimate requests
for public records.

Are the Pillars of Character Counts!, a reasonable standard of conduct for adults?

The leadership of the Albuquerque Public Schools will
not accept the Pillars of Character Counts! as their own
standards of conduct, despite their inescapable obligation to
step up as role models of the standards of conduct that they
establish and enforce upon students.

There is no law that requires public servants to hold themselves
accountable to any standard of conduct other than the law;
the lowest standard of acceptable conduct.

What makes the leadership of the APS different from all other
public servants, is that they the senior most role models of
the student standards of conduct;
the Pillars of Character Counts!

What does that mean exactly?

It means that they are accountable to
the Pillars of Character Counts!,
even if they don't like it.

They are not accountable under the law.

This particular "law" is unenforceable, except by a large enough
outpouring of public outrage.

Outrage, which has so far, declined to manifest itself;

due in no small part to the lack of coverage by the
Albuquerque Journal, whose editors maintain that;
the refusal of the leadership of the APS to step up to honest
accountability as role models,

is not "newsworthy".

Robert "the weasel" Lucero proposes greater restrictions on Public Forum.

Robert Lucero doesn't like it when I stand up at a public forum
and ask him to explain why he will not stand up as a role model
of the Pillars of Character Counts!.

The First Amendment to the Constitution protects the right
of citizens to "petition" their government.

Public Forums are one means of petition. They are in fact,
the purest example of it.

Lucero has suggested to District Relations Committee Chair,
Lorenzo Garcia, that comments at the public forum at
committee meetings be limited to subjects that he approves
of personally.

Even the very poorest excuses for public servants are required
to allow the petition of government, including public forums.

The very finest of public servants, encourage it.

Winston Brooks mad dogged me!

I was already seated, and waiting for the District Relations Committee meeting to begin.

Winston Brooks came, scanned the room, smiled at people, and
then his eyes met mine.

I swear to God, he mad dogged me.

According to newspaper accounts from Wichita,
Winston Brooks has anger management issues.
(I cannot link, because they are archived at the Wichita Eagle's site. link
Quoted in significant part, Wednesday, March 15 & 16, 2,000.)

(emphasis added)

"Once the cameras were turned off after Tuesday's televised meeting on the Wichita school bond issue, things got ugly between Superintendent Winston Brooks and anti-tax activist Karl Peterjohn."

"The men's faces were just inches from each other as they traded jabs through clenched teeth."

""Karl, why do you only attack the Wichita school district? Why don't you fight bond issues anywhere else?" Brooks asked."

"But before Peterjohn could finish his sentence, Brooks exploded. You're a racist and a bigot," he shouted, pointing a finger at Peterjohn, then abruptly walking away."

"When reached after the meeting, Brooks said he wasn't sorry for what he called Peterjohn."

I have noticed one glaring discrepancy;

""He has an ax to grind against minority, poor children, and he does not dispute the fact," Brooks said."

Apparently, the gentleman had "disputed" the fact; immediately after being insulted, and again, later on.

""I take total exception with your comment, sir," Peterjohn replied."

"Peterjohn said he "categorically denies every inaccurate accusation" that Brooks made."

""This is the first time an allegation of racism or bigotry has tied into a tax referendum issue," Peterjohn said."

Audience members were not much impressed either, with Brooks' performance.

"Brooks' comments were out of line, said Jeffery Whitney, 40, ...

"To call a person a racist and a bigot just because the person doesn't agree with you on an issue goes beyond the pale."

"It's unfortunate that a factual discussion on the bond issue is going to be diverted into some unfortunate, emotional, irrational statement by the superintendent," he said. "I was surprised and stunned by the turn of the events at the end of the show.""

OK, so March 15 & 16, 2000 is a long time ago.

Brooks, in the intervening 9 years has gained regained
control over his emotions.

... not.

Security camera footage of the incident outside the
Policy Committee meeting, will show Brooks
"getting in my face". link

A commenter on the Topix forum,
wrote that, Winston Brooks had
chewed my ass.

From my vantage point,
about 6 inches away,
I can tell you that the man is still
quite comfortable with threatening
physical intimidation of people
he disagrees with.


And now he is threatening me with mad dogs, because
I am asking him to explain why 89,000 students in the APS
are expected to model and promote
the Pillars of Character Counts!, and
he is not.

For the record,
The right to ask that question without fear of retribution or retaliation, is a constitutionally protected human right.




photo Mark Bralley

APS administrative and executive role modeling of the Pillars of Character Counts!

The leadership of the APS has been asked to tell the truth
about administrative and executive role modeling of the
Pillars of Character Counts!.

They don't have to respond to the question in a public forum,
although they are reasonably obliged to. I can understand
why that would not be their preference.

They can, and always could have, responded to the question
in any way they wanted to.

They pay Monica Armenta well,
to be able to answer this question in the best possible light.

And she has not.

Even when cast in the best possible light,
they are ashamed of their answer.

There is a cover up of the truth, at the highest levels of the
leadership of the APS.

An ethics and accountability scandal is being hidden from
voters, in order to manipulate the outcome of an election.

JOURNAListic malpractice.

The Albuquerque Journal, our newspaper of record, has a
responsibility to fully inform voters in order to prepare them
to participate meaningfully in the upcoming bond issue election.

Instead, they steadfastly refuse to investigate and report upon
the ethics and accountability scandal in the leadership of the
APS. link.

Instead, they steadfastly refuse to investigate and report upon
the need for an impartial standards and accountability audit of
the entire leadership of the APS,
before the election.

The Journal will not report to voters, that Paula Maes once
boasted that she would never allow an audit that would
name the names of the corrupt and the incompetent in the
leadership of the APS.

Nor, will the Journal report that she has made good, her boast.

Talk about pay to play;

The leadership of the APS buys a whole bunch of Journal
advertising space, and coincidentally; the leadership of the APS
gets favorable coverage in preparation for an upcoming election.
link

Can anyone say; Journalistic malpractice?

APS School Board (tacitly) admits to characterlessness and/or cowardice.

The APS Student Standards of Conduct read;

Students are expected to model and promote
the Pillars of Character Counts!

The APS Leadership Standards of Conduct read;

Leaders are expected to model and promote
the Pillars of Character Counts!

There are good role models in the leadership of the APS.
There are positive role models in the leadership of the APS.
There are no role models of the Pillars of Character Counts!

Not one. link

I have repeatedly suggested that;

there are only two reasons that they will not discuss
administrative and executive role modeling
of the Pillars of Character Counts!;
openly and honestly.

One being, a lack of character, the other, being a lack of courage.

And they have (tacitly) agreed;

implied (as by an act or by silence) rather than expressed
understood without being openly expressed; implied
silent; saying nothing, unvoiced or unspoken
unexpressed, unspoken, unsaid, implicit.

Implied by or inferred from actions or statements:

It has been 70 days since David Robbins put
the role modeling clause on the table for an open and
honest discussion. The clause reads;

In no case shall the standards of conduct for adults,
be lower than the standards of conduct for students.

70 days later, and still, the open and honest discussion has
not taken place.

They are stonewalling.

Stonewalling is specifically and expressly prohibited according
to the Pillars of Character Counts!

The Pillars of Character Counts! prohibit;

"... 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.

The leadership of the APS has invested a great deal of money
in creating the belief, and leaving the impression that, character
counts in the leadership of the APS.

There are at least two senior APS administrators who are being
paid specifically to create the belief and leave the impression
that, character counts in the leadership of the APS.

They are creating beliefs, and leaving impressions, that are
deliberately misleading, that are dishonest, that are unethical.

Their conduct is diametrically opposite to the message that
they are supposed to be teaching our children.

Instead of teaching them to embrace character and courage
and honor,

by their example, they are instead, teaching them to be
hypocrites; short on character and/or short on courage.



We should not be so worried that our children never listen to us,
as we should be worried that they are always watching us.

Sinclair

What would change do you suppose?

I am trying to institutionalize Character Counts! in the APS.

The leadership of the APS is trying to stop me without ever
having told the truth to stakeholders.

There will never be an open and honest discussion of
administrative and executive role modeling of
the Pillars of Character Counts!.

So what difference does it make?

I am really not the only person who believes in
Character Counts!. If you google it, you get 1,770,000 hits.

The people who support Character Counts! will argue that
there will be less truancy and a lower drop out rate.
There will be less bullying and vandalism.
Adults will regain charge in their schools.
There will be less teacher burnout.

Test scores will skyrocket.

The deliberate decision of the leadership of the APS
to sabotage Character Counts! is bad for everybody,
except for the incompetent and the corrupt
in the leadership of the APS.
For them, it works out great.

Students cannot be held honestly accountable to
the Pillars of Character Counts!,
if no one is willing to step up and show them what it looks like.

Its easy to tell kids a story about George Washington and a
cherry tree. It is far more difficult, and far more important,
to show them what it looks like to accept honest accountability
for your conduct.

The best thing that could possibly happen for the 90,000
of our sons and daughters who are students in the APS,
is for them to learn at school, that their character counts.

It is the worst thing that could possibly happen,
if you're one of a handful of good ol' boys with a record to hide.

There is not a legitimate agenda in the entire APS,
that does not move forward on the day that there is an open
and honest discussion of standards and accountability in
the leadership of the APS.

There is no good an ethical reason, that public servants
should not be held honestly accountable to meaningful
standards of conduct and competence; at least for the few
hours a day that they are the stewards of our trust and treasure.

A right to role models?

Do students in the APS have a right to role models of the
Student Standards of Conduct?

Do they have any right to ask that those that write the rules,
obey the rules?

Do they have any right to ask someone to show them what
it looks like to hold oneself honest accountable to meaningful
standards of conduct?

And if they do,
so what?

Do you believe in "role modeling" and in Santa Claus, and the Tooth Fairy?

• Role Models of the Pillars of Character Counts!
• Santa Claus
• The Tooth Fairy

The odds of running into one of them at 6400 Uptown Blvd
are essentially the same; zero to none.

Why was Ed Briggs even at the Public Forum?

By any reasonable measure, Ed Briggs' 33 years of service
to his community, are a record of service and dedication
far beyond the call.

APS administrators who have show us far less,
have enjoyed far greater celebration.

And here is Ed Briggs, trying to talk as fast as he can,
in the 120 seconds allowed him by "forum rules",
in an effort to make sure that the rest of his team got the
recognition they deserved.

And then to have even that
meager celebration sullied
by some cheap remark about
there being some doubt in
my mind, about whether
he had earned our respect,

offered for no reason, except
as a red herring,

goes beyond the pale;

(unacceptable;
outside agreed standards
of decency.)

Board meetings are supposed to be broadcast to the
community via TalNet on the Saturday following the
meeting.

This meeting, like most that are embarrassing to the
leadership of the APS, was not, again.




photo Mark Bralley

Trouble with APS links

The following comment was just posted.

Those links never work. Last time I tried to manually
chase down a boardbook link I got so frustrated I just
gave up.

Could you do a tutorial on how to start from scratch &
get to them?

No, I can't.

It isn't so much that

• the APS website is basically unsearchable, and that
  
• the identity of the person most responsible for that "unsearchability" is still secret, or that,
• Monica Armenta needs three more subordinates, during a hiring freeze, to run a real website,

as it is that;
even when you get to where the information is supposed to be;
it isn't there.

Take for example; board meeting agendas and minutes.

Rarely are they up on the website in a timely fashion.
Minutes are often not there at all. They routinely vote to
approve minutes that have never been posted on the website.
Some, still have not been posted.

Just last night, in an apparent violation of
the Open Meetings Act, they approved minutes from the
meeting before the last. State law requires draft minutes in
ten days, and approval of those minutes at the next regular meeting.

Is isn't so much that you can't find the truth,
as it is that,

there is nothing you can do about the fact that
you can't find the truth.

There are more tactful words, I would suppose, but not more honest.

The leadership of the APS steadfastly refuses to enable an
open and honest discussion of administrative and
executive role modeling of the student standards of conduct.

They refuse for some reason.

I can think of two. I can think of only two.
I have begged readers for years, to suggest a third.
I have offered those I have offended, ample opportunity
to point to the third, anonymously or otherwise.

I have never, not posted a comment.
(With two exceptions, which were simply mean spirited or obscene, and
I have no obligation what so ever, to indulge that kind of behavior.)

We are left with only two reasons on the table, that the
leadership of the APS will not be honest with stakeholders.


I reiterate my request;
somebody, anybody, please tell me what other reason there
could possibly be, that the leadership of the APS will not
open and honestly discuss role modeling, or standards, or
accountability, except that;

1 They lack the courage, and/or
2 They lack the character

Just in; a friend has suggested a third;

"because it is politically expedient."

Is it acceptable according to the Pillars of Character Counts!
to prevent an open an honest, public discussion of standards
and accountability, because it is "politically expedient"?

The APS Student Standards of Conduct;
the Pillars of Character Counts!, are online, link

Here quoted in significant part;

1. TRUSTWORTHINESS

When others trust us, they give us greater leeway because they feel we don’t need monitoring to assure that we’ll meet our obligations. They believe in us and hold us in higher esteem. That’s satisfying. At the same time, we must constantly live up to the expectations of others and refrain from even small lies or self-serving behavior that can quickly destroy our relationships.

Simply refraining from deception is not enough. Trustworthiness is the most complicated of the six core ethical values and concerns a variety of qualities like honesty, integrity, reliability and loyalty.

Honesty

There is no more fundamental ethical value than honesty. We associate honesty with people of honor, and we admire and rely on those who are honest. But honesty is a broader concept than many may realize. It involves both communications and conduct.

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.

It would appear that the 90,000 of our sons and daughters in
the APS, are being told that political expediency is not
an acceptable choice.

Not if, their character counts.

Political expediency is denied them, as both cowardly and corrupt.


And we are back to two;

1 They lack the courage, and/or
2 They lack the character

to enable an open and honest discussion of
the Pillars of Character Counts!

I wish I had a picture of Ed Briggs.

He is the Principal at Grant Middle School.
I have known and respected him for almost three decades.

When he walked through the board room, I leaned over to
the person next to me, and said, that guy is probably the
best principal in the APS.

Then came the Public Forum, and my biweekly reminder that
stakeholders still don't know the truth;
there is not a single administrator or board member in the
entire leadership of the APS, who is willing to stand up to
honest accountability as a role model of
the Student Standards of Conduct.

Then came Matters of Information, and
Winston Brooks turn to speak.

He began by freely admitting that I was starting to piss him off.

And then he had occasion to recognize Ed Briggs.

He gave Ed some well earned praise and then said something
about what a shame it was that, I didn't think Ed was
a good role model.

He did it to draw attention from his own shame.

I have never said, written, or suggested, ever, that there were
no "good" role models in the APS.

Winston Brooks is a "good" role model. He just isn't a
role model of the Student Standards of Conduct.

The obvious truth is that there are a number of "good" role
models in the leadership of the APS.

What there isn't, in the leadership of the APS, are
any role models of the Student Standards of Conduct.

Students are expected to hold themselves honestly accountable
to a specific set of standards, called,
the Pillars of Character Counts!

There is only one way to role model honest accountability to
the Pillars of Character Counts!; and that is,
hold yourself honestly accountable to
the Pillars of Character Counts!

Being a "good" role model is not the same thing as being
a role model of the Pillars of Character Counts!

Being a "positive" role model is not the same thing as being
a role model of the Pillars of Character Counts!

Being a role model of "the highest standards of conduct",
is not the same thing as being a role model of
the Pillars of Character Counts!


Honest accountability to the Pillars of Character Counts!;
is what it takes to be a role model of
the Pillars of Character Counts!

There is no equivalent gesture.

Someone has to show students and staff, what it looks like to
to be honestly accountable to a higher standard of conduct.


Ed Briggs is retiring this week.

He is one of a kind.

I never asked him personally and specifically if he would
stand up as a role model of
the Pillars of Character Counts!


I should have. He probably would have said, yes.

Who ya gonna believe; Marty Chavez, or your lyin' eyes?

He says that he is not a candidate for mayor.

This deliberate deception enables him to use legal loopholes and
technicalities to gain an unfair advantage over his opponents in
the race for mayor.

His defense;

"It's all perfectly legal."

"Legal" is the lowest acceptable standard of conduct.

There is no lower acceptable standard of conduct than the law.

He has 98,000 constituents in the APS.
They are taught that;

A person of character
often has to do more than the law requires, and
less than the law allows.

Marty Chavez should know; he claims to be
a Founding Father of Character Counts!

What has he done in 15 years,
except paint "Character Counts!" on a bunch of city trucks.


And we would still trust this man, why? exactly.




photo Mark Bralley

The first responsible use of power

is to act decisively to prevent its abuse.

Monahan writes; Marty Chavez' character doesn't play.

If you read blogger Joe Monahan this morning, link
Joe argues * that character doesn't play in (mayoral) elections.

I beg to disagree. Character does play.

The only reason it is not on the table right now, is that
there is not a mayoral candidate willing to put it there.

It would mean standing in front of people and responding to
questions about character; candidly, forthrightly, and honestly,
until all of the questions were answered, and
all of them answered.

Marty Chavez' character doesn't play?

If if does not,
then the electorate are idiots with power far greater than
their ability to wield it.



*

A sure-fire way to lose this race is to make it about Chavez's personality and his perhaps outsized ego that leads him to seek constant media exposure. That's old hat to city voters who long ago accepted the incumbent's character flaws, but have embraced his politics."

emphasis added

"But it's all perfectly legal."

Mayor Marty Chavez is using the city treasury to underwrite
his campaign for mayor. link Marjorie Childress NMI

Candidates Richard Romero and RJ Berry held a news
conference to draw attention to Chavez' unethical conduct.



Chavez' response;
it's all "perfectly legal".














"The law" is the lowest standard of conduct acceptable among civilized people.

Chavez' conduct underscores the need for higher standards of
conduct than the law, for the stewards of the public trust and
treasure, and for means to hold public servants accountable to
those higher standards,

at least for the few hours a day that we must trust them
with control over our power, and our resources.




photo Mark Bralley

APS Board Meeting minutes editorialized

If you read the draft minutes, link, for the last board meeting,
the ones that will be approved tonight under a process that
does not allow anyone to object to anything in the minutes,
you will find editorializing.

There is no place for editorializing in the minutes of public
meetings.

III. Public Forum –

Ms. Griego called up the one person that signed up for
public forum:

This person spoke about the Character Counts pillars of
character. He urged the board to put an accountability
issue on the table or discuss as to why in his opinion
they were stonewalling this issue.

Stonewalling;

To refuse to answer or cooperate with, the act of stalling,
evading, or filibustering, esp. to avoid revealing politically
embarrassing information.

The board is stalling and evading the issue of role modeling of
the Student Standards of Conduct, in order to avoid revealing
the politically embarrassing truth; they have no intention to ever
step up as role models for students, of the standards of conduct
which they expect students to meet.


"In my opinion", my ass.

A bucket of truth about the JCMS Climate Survey

Imagine that the whole truth and nothing but the truth
about the climate survey long, long ago,
is contained in a bucket.

Take out the truth that you will not share,
and
about which you have an understanding with stakeholders.

To whom does the rest of the truth in the bucket belong?

To whom do the public records belong?


Dear Leadership of the APS,

Tell the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth.

And then stand for questions.

Role model for students, what honest accountability looks like.

The reason that creating even the appearance of impropriety
is prohibited by APS School Board Policy, and
their Code of Ethics, is because the appearance, in and of itself,
does damage. Damage has been done.

Not telling the truth creates the appearance of impropriety.

There are staff members at JCMS, who now have less respect
for the leadership of the APS because they won't tell the truth
about the Climate Survey results.


The longer they don't tell the truth,
the more you've got to wonder, why?


Don't waste any time reporting this to APS' SilentWhistle;
the manifestation of their own waste, fraud and abuse.

They no longer accept complaints of ethical misconduct.

Student discipline at AHS

I am writing this merely for illustration. I have no reason to
believe that I could not have seen what I saw, at any APS
high school.

I have in fact argued a number of times that it could be seen
at every APS high school.

Mark Bralley and I were being escorted off campus by two
unarmed members of the Praetorian Guard. Both seemed
like decent people caught in the middle. No complaints.

As we walked through the front patio, I noticed two students
dry humping on some nearby concrete architecture.

I looked to see what the guard would do.

She told them to stop.
They didn't;
until they felt like it.

Next we passed an AHS staff member, apparently on duty
in the parking lot. He was facing down a half dozen youngsters
with a big water balloon. They appeared to be enjoying teasing
the gentleman over his impotency.


Our truck was parked near by so the guards had the opportunity
to engage the would be drenchers while still completing their
more important assignment, escorting us off of public property.


The guards told the youngsters to get rid of their water balloon.



They didn't;
until they felt like it.



Who is in charge here? Whose will is being done?

All of this has a profound effect on nearly every issue;
truancy, dropping out, low test scores, you name it.

Student discipline, and in particular chronically disruptive
students, will never be talked about openly and honestly.

Because it is the single greatest failure of the leadership of the
APS; allowing children to take charge of schools.

And because
they don't want to be held accountable for that failure.


Character counts in the leadership of the
Albuquerque Public Schools.


Right,
and a pint of Haagen-Dazs link serves four. unk



photo Mark Bralley

Mayor Marty is writing checks the city can't cash.

At the news conference on drop outs, at AHS,
Mayor Chavez promised to solve the drop out problem.

Background;

The reason kids don't attend school is because
they don't want to attend school.

There are kids who do not want to go to school
to study for NCLB tests.

Not everything in the NCLB driven curriculum is
appropriate for every kid. Many, many things that are
appropriate, are not in the NCLB curriculum at all.

There are kids who do not, can not, and will not,
ever fit into the NCLB mold. Nor should they be
expected to.

I asked if there was an opportunity to offer student driven
curriculum instead of NCLB driven curriculum as a means
of addressing the truancy and dropout issue.

Chavez pointed to me,
wanted to know if I was
"media" and then allowed
my question.

He said there could
be a student driven
curriculum.


A student driven curriculum would be offered in defiance of
the NCLB Act. It would mean forfeiting federal monies.
The money would have to come from somewhere else instead,
and Mayor Chavez said "no problem";

... writing a check that, the city treasury can't cash.




photo Mark Bralley

AHS students had front row seats for a civil rights violation.

Mark Bralley and I, were precisely the two people that the
founding fathers had in mind when they wrote the
constitutional protection for our right to be a free press.

We were doing exactly what we were supposed to be doing.

Nearby, School Board Member Lorenzo Garcia was sitting
with about a dozen kids. They were chatting in their own
language. He was role modeling exceptional conduct and accomplishment.


He could have, if had known what was really going on,
pointed to what was happening ten feet away.

"Look kids, the free press."

Instead,

the kids watched APS' Praetorian Guard remove any
press that were not a party to the agreement between the APS
and the approved local "media", the ones who are party to
the agreement to slant coverage of the APS, link, in order to
manipulate the outcome of an upcoming bond issue election.


Somewhere on that patio, I would be willing to bet,
there is a big poster or banner that reads;

Character Counts!

Could this possibly be any more outrageous?!

APS press conference goes bad.

An otherwise uneventful press conference at AHS, turned into
a PR nightmare for the Albuquerque Public Schools.

Mark Bralley, link, and I were thrown out of the AHS press
conference in retaliation for our effort to investigate and report
upon the truth.

It is important work;

"The Press was protected so that it could bare the secrets
of the government and inform the people.
Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose
deception in government. And paramount among the
responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent
any part of the government from deceiving the
people."
(emphasis added)
Justice Hugo L Black

After the most of the conference was over, a group of four of
APS' Praetorian Guard* confronted us, telling us that we
had to leave because the press conference was "... not a public
event".

(Which begs at least one question; why not? Why do press conferences
with a mayor and a school superintendent need to be secret from the public?)

In any event, we established that we were not among the great
unwashed, that we were in fact "the press". In the most comic
part of the interaction, Mark showed them a press pass for the
White House. To which, the armed Praetorian responded;

"... never heard of them."

We decided to have a little fun with them, so we took them up
on their offer to escort us to the administration.

As Mark and I were establishing
the facts, Monica Armenta
barged in. She has exactly zero
authority at the school but,
took control of the situation
any way.

She informed us that her
"23 years" as a news reader
made her an authority
on the First Amendment.

She wanted to see "our press credentials". Of course, there is
no such thing as press "credentials". What Armenta was looking
for was something issued by a media outlet that met her
personal approval.

A free press is credentialed by the United States Constitution.The right to be a free press is a constitutionally protected
human right. There is no piece of paper, badge, trinket, or secret
handshake that must be learned in order to exercise
a constitutional right.

She later suggested that such a credential is available through
the NM State Police. It is not, of course. The NNSP has
neither the authority, nor any apparent interest in,
"credentialing" members of a free press.

Armenta's suggestion proves only that she was asking to
see "credentials" that she had never seen before gained
through a process about which she knows nothing.

When I asked her to cite the rule, regulation, or policy
that she was "enforcing", she told me that she "didn't have
the time" to tell me.

Seeing that they were getting nowhere with that tack, they
moved on the the fact that we didn't have "visitor passes".

We didn't, because the principal had earlier made it quite
clear to us that we didn't need one. A fact that he admitted
to, on the record.

No one else at the press conference was wearing a visitor pass.

Monica Armenta is laboring under two false assumptions;

1. That there is in fact some "credential", without which, one
cannot exercise their constitutionally protected human right
to be a free press, and

2. that she has the authority to demand to see those
credentials. She does not.
Her position as APS' Executive Director of Communications
does not provide for her, a warrant to invade our privacy.
Who we represent as members of a free press is none of her
business. A free press is not accountable to Monica Armenta.

The United States Supreme Court has ruled that
a guy in a basement with a Xerox machine is a free press.

Does Monica Armenta really suppose that
the First Amendment doesn’t apply to bloggers?

Does anyone really suppose that there are credentials,
without which, a citizen cannot exercise their constitutionally
protected human right to be a free press? And further that,
that credential is issued to them at the whim of the government?

It wouldn't be a right, if you have to have Monica Armenta's
blessing in order to exercise it.



* APS' Police Department is not accredited, certified, or
certificated by anyone. They report directly to, and only to,
the leadership of the APS.

Any complaint against them, would have to be filed with the
same people who ordered them to harass us in the first place.




photo Mark Bralley