As long as the Rules Committee of the NMRP is getting together anyway

Letter of Complaint to the
Rules Committee of the Republican Party of New Mexico
October 20, 2008

I understand that in order for action to be taken on a complaint, it is necessary to furnish;

1. The rule involved as identified by the Uniform State Rules
2. The objection stated
3. The action desired

1. I would like to challenge “the rule of the gavel”. Regretfully, I cannot cite the rule because it is apparently unwritten, which is part of the problem.

2. I object to it because it is inconsistent with honest accountability to any recognized code of ethics. Further, that honest accountability to ethical standards of conduct is a family value.

3. The required action; the Rules Committee of the Republican Party of New Mexico must repudiate unequivocally, the notion that there is any such thing as “the rule of the gavel” among men and women who are honestly accountable to any real higher standard of conduct.

The required action is for the Rules Committee of the Republican Party of New Mexico to abolish the disconnect between advocating family values and practicing family values.

Respectfully submitted

Charles MacQuigg


Update; I am able to cite a specific rule that prohibits the exercise of "the rule of the gavel"; rule 1-2-1-B;

1-2. GENERAL - PARTY MEMBERSHIP, PARTY GOVERNMENT, CONVENTION PARTICIPATION

1-2-1. PARTY MEMBERSHIP/PARTICIPATION

A. Party Membership

B. Participation: It is the intent and purpose of these rules to encourage and allow the broadest possible participation of all Republican voters in Republican Party activities at all levels and to assure that the Republican Party is open and accessible.

Update; 3:15 pm.
It has been suggested to me that filing this complaint at this time would not be helpful. Therefore, I have contacted Lou Melvin and asked that action on the complaint be suspended until further notice.

Jon Barela's sin.

Jon Barela has his shingle hanging in two worlds;
the leadership of the Republican Party of New Mexico, and
the leadership of the Albuquerque Public Schools.

I would submit that, Barela has broken the rules in
both worlds.

He broke an NMRP rule that prohibited him from contesting
against other republicans for a public office, without
first vacating his state office in the Republican Party.

He broke the School Board's Code of Ethics, by refusing to
model honest accountability for his own conduct.

In the world of leadership of a school district, Barela is one of
eight of the most senior role models of the student standard
of conduct. As a role model of a nationally recognized, accepted
and respected code of ethics, he had a responsibility to step up
to accountability for his conduct.

Three weeks later, he still has not stepped up.

Three weeks later, Jon Barela has not demonstrated before
students what it looks like to be asked a legitimate question,
and then to answer that question candidly, forthrightly, and
honestly.

Three weeks after chopping down the cherry tree,
he is still ducking accountability.

It one thing to tell students a story about George Washington
and the cherry tree. It is a whole 'nother thing to show children
by personal example, what it looks like to step up and embrace
accountability.

The leadership of the APS steadfastly refuses to discuss
role modeling of the student standard of conduct.

They removed from their own standard of conduct the phrase,
and expectation that;

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

Jon Barela has failed as a role model of the student standard of conduct, regardless of whether or not he can be held accountable for that failure or not.



photo by; Mark Bralley

Schmidly's Son Turns Down Job - problem unresolved

The Journal reports this morning that Brian Schmidly
has backed away from the firestorm that began with his
appointment to a cushy new job at the UNM. link

Many suppose that with Brian Schmidly's decision, the problem
disappears. It does not. If the hiring did not violate a standing
hiring policy, it should have.

If there is not a policy prohibiting the "appearance of a conflict
of interest", there should be.

Damage was done to the credibility of the leadership of the UNM.

The Journal reports;

"It is important to both of us that I assert once and for all that I applied for this job in good faith, and took part in an open hiring process that I was assured and believe to this day was proper and scrupulously fair." Brian Schmidly

UNM also issued a statement from President Schmidly in which he reiterated that he had nothing to do with his son getting the job.

I have no first hand information one way or the other, but it has been suggested on the backside of a blog, or forum, I forget which, that Physical Plant Director Mary Vosevich's own continued employment at the UNM was at risk, and that she hired the University President's son to cement her own position.

There is still the possibility that that was the motivation for the hiring and does not directly repudiate the claim that President Schmidly "had nothing to do with his son getting the job." Preferential treatment has not been ruled out, even if it was not done with the direct knowledge or approval of the UNM President.

The system is still broken.

Is legal weaselry a family value?

The integrity of the New Mexico Republican Party is on the line.

One of the Grand ol' Party's, good ol' boys has broken one of
their good ol' rules link; and the brouhaha cannot be hidden.
The allegation will be resolved on the record.

The Rules Committee of the NMRP will do the resolving.

The allegation is that a standard of conduct remains unmet.

The defense will ride on "what the meaning of the word 'is' is;
and upon other technicalities, loopholes, and legal weaselry.

They will argue that by circumventing the election process, link
they also circumvented the rule that required Jon Barela
to vacate his state office in the NMRP before contesting
the public office against other republicans.

The Rules Committee of the New Mexico Republican Party
will decide whether or not the rules apply to the good ol' boys.

They will decide if the rules can be simply swept away by some
indefensible nonsense called the "rule of the gavel".

Pause for a moment please, to consider what the "rules
committee" means to the integrity of the organization.

The Rules Committee of the New Mexico Republican Party
will decide if honest accountability for one's conduct is a family value (worth defending).

I would argue that it is. I would point out that, that is why the very first illustrative story we tell our children is about George Washington and the cherry tree. The success of the human race is carried upon the shoulders of those willing to be held accountable to a higher standard of conduct than the law; the absolutely lowest standard of acceptable conduct.

The integrity of the NMRP and their commitment to family values, rides on the decision of the rules committee.

Worthy of notice;

the involvement of the NMRP Rules Committee is likely to be
the only illumination of the tip of a very large iceberg; the ethics and accountability scandal in the leadership of the Albuquerque Public Schools.

The leadership of the APS has two priorities;

1. hiding the APS Modrall relationship from public scrutiny, and
2. hiding the good ol' boy organizational structure of the APS from public scrutiny.

in no particular order.

The incestuous appointment of Jon Barela, veteran of Modrall and currently serving APS good ol' boy, to the board of education is an outrage against the public interest. The good ol' boys have returned to the roots of their success; appointing their cronies to the board. link

Hiding the iceberg, the Albuquerque Journal which steadfastly refuses to report on any aspect of the ethics and accountability scandal in the leadership of the APS. It is aided and abetted in the cover up, by the movers and shakers at KOB, KOAT, KRQE, and KKOB.

I swear.

The stewardship of public trust and treasure at the UNM

In the Journal this morning; link sub req

Ten UNM employees are to be laid off, their jobs to be outsourced.

Chris Vallejos, an Associate Vice President at UNM, said outsourcing (golf) course maintenance will save UNM $100,000 to $200,000 a year.

Which begs the question;

How many other functions at the UNM could be outsourced at a net saving to tax payers of $10,000 to $20,000 per year, per employee?

And,

What consequence will befall Chris Vallejos, an Associate Vice President at UNM, who has been in charge of golf course maintenance for years (?), while wasting $10,000 to $20,000 per year, per employee?

My guess; nothing.

Or is that just too cynical?

The thick plottens in Schmidly hiring

The Journal has an article this morning about the caliber of the
candidates that the UNM President's son "bested" in the hunt
for a brand new $94K a year job at UNM. link sub req

Brian Schmidly had some serious competition for the opening
for Associate Director of Sustainability at the UNM.

According to the Journal, Schmidly was hired by Physical Plant Director Mary Vosevich. Vosevich said that Brian Schmidly was the most qualified and that his family ties had no effect on her decision. President Schmidly said he had nothing to do with his son's hiring.

He obviously had nothing to do with his son not being hired, either.

The older Schmidly had a responsibility to the UNM that, at best, he ignored. Co-incidentally, or not, it worked out just great for his son.

Among the qualifications for the job; seven years of direct experience. The UNM President's son is getting credit, apparently, for being a student and a member of a family of educators.

"He's been around higher education all of his life, certainly, as a student. His family has been in the educational field for years"

On the damage done by the "apparent conflict of interest",
Staff Council President Loyola Chastain said;

"This is another demoralization issue for the staff at UNM"

There is damage done by the appearance of a conflict of interest.

It is not potential damage, it is not possible damage, it is actual damage. It is actual damage done by UNM hiring practices which either do not prohibit creating the appearance of a conflict of interest, or which were not followed in the hiring practices that create the appearance of a conflict of interest.

In either case, stakeholders lose, UNM employees lose, the credibility of the leadership of the UNM loses.

People will bitch for awhile, and then Brian Schmidly will assume his new job, anybody who created any real static will be dealt with, and the good ol' boys will have won again.

So much for government of the people, by the people, and for the people. It has been given short shrift again in favor of government of the good ol' boys, by the good ol' boys, and for the good ol' boys.

... and their offspring.

"We need parents to engage ..."

Whenever people get together to talk about how to improve the education of our children, it isn't very long before someone says;

"We need to engage their parents."

There are a lot of aspects of a child's life that affect their participation in their education. And talking about aspects over which we have no control, is pointless.

Sure, lets do everything we reasonably can to engage parents, and every other thing we can do to improve a child's life outside of school.

But let us not seriously consider any plan, the success of which
depends on changing things that we cannot change.

We need, to the extent possible;
to provide everything a child needs to succeed at school,
at school,

because there will always be kids whose lives
hold no promise of ever meeting those needs.

This was brought home to me when I was chiding a student for not doing the homework that I had assigned. I found out later that the kid lived in a box on the back porch of his house.

Lets us not consider a plan that meets the need of children whose parents we can engage,
but does not address the needs of children who have no parents to engage.

We cannot focus only on reading and 'riting and 'rithmetic.

We cannot focus only on No Child Left Behind testing.

There is a very real possibility that path to success on NCLB
tests, and the path to addressing the real needs of children,
are diametrically opposite.

For me, I would rather graduate young adults who were decent human beings with decent values, and with a capacity to be effective and efficient lifelong learners,

than to graduate, or drop out, a bunch of burned out, disinterested, and unmotivated young adults with no real hope of amounting to anything;

even though they were once able to once pass a few tests
on reading, 'riting, and 'rithmetic.

The "appearance of a conflict of interest" is a bell rung

When UNM hired the president's son, Brian Schmidly, the
appearance of a conflict of interest happened. It didn't "begin",
it wasn't suggested, it wasn't implied; it happened.
The appearance of a conflict of interest happened in its entirety.
The damage has been done.


The reputation of a leading university has been soiled.

Again.

If this hiring was not prohibited by UNM policy,
then shame on the people who write UNM policies.
It should be a violation of policy.

What a shame it is that there will still be no revolt;
it still has not gotten bad enough to put and end to it.
Taxpayers have been pushed only to the point of bitching
some more.



All that is necessary for evil to prevail in the world
is for good men to do nothing. edmund burke

NMAGO falls flat on Inspection of Public Records Act enforcement

APS Custodian of Public Records, Rigo Chavez has created conditions for the surrender of public records which make it impossible for me to inspect and/or copy them.

The accommodation (of my legitimate disability) that I seek would be easier for APS, and cheaper for taxpayers. There is no downside for the District, except that it would make it possible for me to look at the record of APS Modrall and point to the evidence that APS Modrall has used unwitting taxpayer support of education to fund litigation against the public interest.

The refusal to make the accommodation serves only one purpose, and that is to make it more difficult to exercise my right to inspect and or copy public records. The refusal to accommodate my disability is absolutely and completely unjustifiable by an ethical argument.

Never the less, Assistant Attorney General Zachary Shandler writes;

Our jurisdiction ... is limited to the IPRA determination;
it is up to the parties to resolve accommodations
regarding disability issues.

So there you have it; the good ol' boys don't have to surrender public records, and it is left up to a stove in old shop teacher to find some way to make the good ol' boys follow the law.

What crap; what unmitigated, unvarnished and inexcusable crap.

It is unfortunate that the leadership of the APS, Winston Brooks, cannot be shamed into compliance, as he and the other good ol' boys simply have no shame to play on.

cc Winston Brooks upon posting.

Bill Reed and I shook hands.

The last time APS Chief of Police, Bill Reed's hand touched mine, he was holding mine behind my back, as he arrested me for standing in the back of a regular school board meeting, wearing a paper elephant mask; protesting the fact that the leadership of the APS is ignoring the elephant in the room; the ethics and accountability scandal in the leadership of the APS.

I regard our handshake as a new beginning.

Are there other men and women of character and courage and honor in the leadership of the APS?

Of course there are.

There are men and women who would end good ol' boy leadership in favor of honest accountability to meaningful standards of conduct and competence for public servants within their public service.

We don't know who they are because they have yet to stand up for what they believe in.



When I was a public servant whose job it was to convince youngsters that their character counted, I had occasion to give them a tee shirt. On its front and back it read;

Stand up for what you believe in,
even if you are standing alone.

And then to the eternal shame of the leadership of the APS,
students who came to believe that character counts,
were left to stand alone.

A student in the APS who is looking for a principled resolution of a legitimate complaint against any of the good ol' boys, is denied that right. The system will not stand in defense of the complainant. That student will stand alone against the good ol' boys.

As will employees, as will taxpayers, as will all stakeholders.

The leadership of the APS, the "bad" ones,
would rather be accountable to each other than accountable to
meaningful standards of conduct and competence,
impartially enforced by someone powerful enough
to hold them accountable, even against their will.

The first annual Impartial Standards and Administrative Accountability Audit of the entire leadership of the APS will reveal few standards and virtually no accountability. The Meyners Audit of the APS Finance Division proved that conclusively.

The Meyners Audit revealed that the APS Finance Division,
trusted by tax payers with a billion tax dollars per year,
has never had;

1. adequate standards, nor
2. adequate accountability, nor
3. adequate record keeping.

Unless there has been a miracle of biblical proportion,
millions of tax dollars are lost or stolen.

And the leadership of the APS will not stand for questions about
the public interests in the APS Finance Division; they will not answer
legitimate questions and promise to be candid, forthright, and honest.

An impartial audit of any division in the entire APS will reveal
the same thing; no standards, no accountability, and no records kept.

If the allegation were untrue, Rigo Chavez, Monica Armenta,
Winston Brooks, or somebody could hold up a few sheets of paper and say;

• here are our meaningful standards of conduct and competence, and
• here is the system by which we are held accountable to those standards; an impartial system powerful enough to hold us accountable even against our will.

They are so far from being able to do that, that cannot participate in a candid, forthright and honest discussion of administrative standards and accountability.

Of course there are decent men and women in the leadership of the APS.

But how can well tell them from the rest?

It is time for them to stand up to be counted;
it is time for them to stand up for what they believe in.



There are only two reasons not to stand up for what you believe in;

1. a lack of moral courage, and/or
2. a calculation of cost and benefit which reveals that the belief is unworthy of the sacrifice required to defend it.

Sacrifice is the currency of commitment.
Commitment is proven by willing sacrifice;
commitment is proven only by willing sacrifice.

There is no equivalent gesture.

Everything else is just talk.

It is time for the good and decent administrators to stand up for what they believe in.



I would suggest that every administrator pick a side;
good ol' boys, ot standards and accountability,
good, or evil.

And then stand up for what you believe in.

Even if you are standing alone.

I'm not saying that the good ol' boys are evil;
but when Edmund Burke wrote;

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

These are the people he was writing about.

If we really want students to grow up embracing honor and courage and character, someone has to show them what it looks like.

Why don't you show kids what honor and courage and character look like?

Why don't you show these kids what it looks like to hold oneself
honestly accountable to meaningful standards of conduct and competence?

Why don't you stand up for a standards and accountability audit that will end the reign of the good ol' boys that have run the APS for one hundred years?





Disclaimer regarding my feelings about Bill Reed or about any other individual member of the APS Police Department;

Though I have often referred to the APS Police Department as a Praetorian Guard at the command of APS Modrall, I have never intended that that reflect on any individual member of that department. I have named the names of those whom I believe need to face accountability. The rest as far as I know, are decent hard working honorable men and women of character and competence.

It is the one purpose for which the APS Police Department
is abused, that makes it a Praetorian Guard.

What ever else it is, it is a publicly funded, private police force that is neither accredited nor certificated by anyone except the leadership of the APS. It reports directly and only to the leadership of the APS Modrall.

It's Praetorian purpose is to conduct the sole investigation of any complaint made against any one of the good ol' boys, and then to surrender all of the evidence from that investigation to the exclusive custody of the good ol' boys,
to do with as they choose.

When former APS Police Chief Gil Lovato had the opportunity to speak on the issue of the internal investigations that had been conducted by him and the Praetorian Guard he said,

When the truth gets out, there will not be
a single senior APS administrator left standing.

Pearce Udall debate an asshander of epic proportion

Politics aside, Steve Pearce handed Tom Udall his ass in last
night's debate. Udall was absolutely crushed by Pearce who
was at the top of his game.

Udall could make no point that Pearce could not rebut.
Submitted as a prime example, Udall accused Pearce of being
a Bush groupie, and Pearce responded by listing a number
of times that Udall had in fact supported Bush on issues where
Pearce had stood against him.

Great stuff.

No wonder Udall has been ducking this confrontation for so long.


KOB TV has video of the debate in four parts. link

Jon Barela as a board member

I watched Jon Barela at the board meeting tonight.
He announced that he has already met with every principal in
his district and is planning a second visit with each.

He appears competent, energetic, enthusiastic and intelligent.

All else equal, he seems like he would be an above average,
maybe even an exceptional board member.

Alas and alack, all else is not equal.

Jon Barela, like the rest of the leadership of the APS will not
stand up as a role model of the student standard of conduct.

Jon Barela, like the rest of the leadership of the APS will not
agree to be held honestly accountable to meaningful standards
of conduct and competence as a public servant, by an impartial
system powerful enough to hold him accountable even against
his will.

Jon Barela, like the rest of the leadership of the APS will not
will not support an honest and impartial administrative
accountability audit despite overwhelming and compelling
evidence of the need for such an audit.

Jon Barela, like the rest of the leadership of the APS will not
tell the truth, he will not agree to sit and accept legitimate
questions about the public interests in the public schools,
and then respond to them candidly, forthrightly and honestly.

Ergo, Jon Barela is unacceptable

• as a role model of the student standard of conduct,
• as a senior public servant and steward of the public trust and treasure, and
  
• as a "leader" of the APS.

cc Jon Barela upon posting.

Complaint against Jon Barela, rev. 3

NMGOP Rules Committee Chair, Lou Melvin
is still not happy with the form and format of my complaint.

Rev 1 was deemed unacceptable for action because it was submitted to her ears, but not to her eyes.

Rev 2 was submitted in the form of an email for her to read. It was deemed unacceptable because I did not include (because I had not been asked to include); "The Action Desired".

We will see how Rev 3 flies; it is written, and it contains all of the elements of which I have been apprised. It was emailed to Lou Melvin upon posting.
c/o Pam Kingston's email address (Melvin does not have an email address of her own.)

To Whom It May Concern:

This email constitutes the filing of a complaint.

THE RULE:

1-4-1. WHEN A PARTY OFFICER BECOMES A CANDIDATE FOR PUBLIC OFFICE

In the event the State Chairman, or any other State Officer of the Republican State Central Committee, shall file as a candidate for Public Office, and more than one Republican files as a candidate for that office, the State Officer shall immediately vacate the Party Office. In that event, the successor shall be selected in the manner for filling vacancies as in these Rules provided.

THE OBJECTION:

Jon Barela contested for a vacant seat on the Albuquerque Public Schools Board of Education (a Public Office) against at least three registered Republicans; Kathy Frazier, Mike Gibson, and Arturo Candelaria.
Jon Barela did not vacate his seat as required by NMRP Rule 1-4-1.

THE ACTION DESIRED:

Jon Barela must be required to vacate his state office as required by NMRP Rule 1-4-1.

This complaint was filed for the first time on Monday October 6, 2008.

My name is Charles MacQuigg

Ms. Melvin was asked to estimate when the complaint would be heard by the Rules Committee. Her response was;

"Currently, all members of the Rules committee are involved with election issues."

I interpret this to mean that the complaint will not be heard for another month or so. Hopefully it will be heard before Jon Barela runs against these same republicans in the February election for the seat on the school board.


update; confirmation that the email was received by the person whose email address, my communication with Ms Melvin takes place.

Your message

To: Pam Kingston
Subject: Re: rules committee meeting
Sent: 10/15/2008 9:07 PM

was read on 10/16/2008 8:39 AM.

Public Information Officers

are public servants hired by public servants.

They are paid tax dollars to deliberately deceive the public
about the state of public resources and power.

Consider for example; Rigo Chavez,
APS' Director of Communications.

And consider Monica Armenta,
APS' Executive Director of Communications.

Who split between them, the better part of a quarter of a million tax dollars a year, and

neither of whom will tell you why

No one in the entire leadership of the APS
is honestly accountable as a role model
of the student standard of conduct.

Why doesn't Jon Barela just 'fess up?

There is no law, no rule, no regulation, no policy which prevents
Jon Barela from responding immediately to a complaint that he
violated NM Republican Party Rules by not vacating his state
office before contesting against other republicans running for
the school board.

If he has a good and ethical explanation, there is no reason to
keep it secret even one day longer.



Today is the eighth business day in the complaint process
and the tenth day that Jon Barela has had to figure out

what would Scooby doo?

He is a senior role model of a standard of conduct that requires
a candid, forthright, honest, and rather immediate response
to the complaint.

He is responsible along with the rest of the leadership of the
APS for enforcing that standard of conduct upon students.

APS School Board meeting tonight

Again they will be asked to name a time, a day, and a place
where they will stand for legitimate questions about the public
interests in the public schools, and then respond to those
questions candidly, forthrightly, and honestly.

Again they will refuse.

Despite the fact that they insist that they want to create
communication between themselves and stakeholders, and

despite the fact that insist that they want to improve public
perceptions of the APS, and

despite their obligations as the senior most role models of a
standard of conduct that requires candid, forthright and honest
responses to legitimate questions.

They model only hypocrisy.

The Albuquerque Journal's education reporter will be there.
She will write nothing about the ethics and accountability
scandal in the leadership of the APS; never has, never will.


The proof, it is said, is in the pudding.
The pudding does not include any opportunity for stakeholders
to ask legitimate questions of the leadership of the APS.

If the leadership of the APS had any intention at all
to be honest with stakeholders, they would provide
an opportunity for stakeholders to ask legitmate questions
without filtration.

They will not, and that is compelling proof of their intention to
continue to hide from stakeholders and the truth.

It is compelling proof of their underlying and overarching dishonesty.


How can stakeholders trust them while they continue to refuse
to offer any indication that they are trustworthy?

How can stakeholders trust them when they continue to refuse
to provide answers to even the simplest and most fundamental
questions like; a request for an honest accounting of the money
they have spent at 6400 Uptown Blvd?

The truth is that they could not care less whether or not
stakeholders trust them. Their day to day existence is
uneffected by the issue of stakeholder trust;
they are still going to get a billion tax dollars a year to spend.
Stakeholder trust does not play.

It doesn't play at least until the next mill levy or bond issue election.
And then they will pay the piper.

"APS Board Candidates Need Transparency, Too"

is the title of an editorial opinion is this morning's Journal link

From that editorial;

Board member Marty Esquivel wants to make that election more transparent and its candidates more accountable by adopting a resolution that encourages them to disclose their campaign contributions and spending, and provides a way for them to do so.

The editors conclude that;

The move promises to foster trust in the APS board,
its members and its decisions.

In a move to guarantee that trust in the leadership of the APS is never restored, the leadership of the APS steadfastly refuses to provide stakeholders any opportunity to ask legitimate questions of the leadership of the APS,

and then to expect candid, honest and forthright responses.

In a disconnect of monumental proportion, APS Superintendent Winston Brooks and the board of education steadfastly refuse to be honest with stakeholders and yet expect to restore public trust.

The Journal's education reporters have watched the board and superintendent refuse to tell the truth over and over and over again, and will not share that truth with stakeholders.

Stakeholders who trust either the leadership of the APS or
the Albuquerque Journal to tell the truth about the public
interests in the public schools will find out eventually that their
trust has been betrayed by both the leadership of the APS and
by the Journal.

NM Republican Party integrity test

There is a complaint floating around in the leadership of the
New Mexico Republican Party. The complaint is against
a state officer.

A week after the complaint was filed, no action has been taken.

They say it is because the complaint has reached only their ears,
but not their eyes.

What bullshit.

Good leadership tolerates due process.

Great leadership expedites it.

There is no good and ethical reason to deny due process to a
legitimate complaint. To do so creates the appearance of a
conflict of interest. It raises the possibility that the good ol' boys
are cutting some slack for one of their own.

Jon Barela contested for a school board seat against fellow
Republicans without having first vacated his office as
First Vice Chairman of the NM Republican Party
as seems to be required by party rules.

The investigation of that complaint requires reading the rule
and then asking Jon Barela if there is a good and ethical
explanation for his apparent failure to obey the rule.

His answer should not take weeks to articulate. In fact,
the longer he takes to write it, the less credibility it has.
At some point he has not only to respond to the complaint,
but also some responsibility to explain why it has taken him
so long to respond.

The integrity of the leadership of the NMGOP rides upon the
question of whether or not that complaint will ever see due process.

So far, the lack of due process implies a lack of integrity.

That suspicion of a lack of integrity attaches itself to candidates
like Darren White who were appointed by these same
good ol' boys, independent of the wishes of stakeholders.
If they are good ol' boys accountable to no one and no rule,
it stands to reason that they would not appoint someone who
would be a threat to their cushy little arrangement.

"Activities keep kids motivated"

In the Journal this morning, you find an article link sub req
by Winston Brooks.

In his essay, Supt. Brooks argues that "after school" activities
will keep students motivated to stay in school.

While I support his argument that we need more after school
activities, I would disagree that they have a profound effect on
motivation in school in general.

Most troubling about the argument that "it is all about after
school activities", is that it supplants the argument that every
aspect of the curriculum during the school day should be subject
to a great deal of scrutiny about the role it plays in motivating
students.

Every class, every subject must be examined in the light of its
effect on engaging students. Any offering, no matter how
valuable it seems in the long run, that acts to unmotivate or
disinterest students will cause as much harm as good.

It is not so much what a student learns, as it is that they grow
into decent human beings with the skill set necessary to become
life long learners.

If a student has the capacity to learn, they will have the
opportunity to learn what they need to know,
when they need to know it. It is possible for a child to
be an interested, motivated, and successful learner,
with no particular interest in history, or literature,
or maybe even in math.

The simple truth is that students will not learn anything
against their will.

The process is not one of "teaching", it is one of "learning".
There is no such thing as an unmotivated and disinterested
"learner", the concept is oxymoronic.

There needs to be a discussion of whether on not we really
need every child to be on the same page in every subject
on every day. It flies in the face of reason. It is only done
that way because that is the way it has always been done.

It is time to think outside the box.

Jon Barela's defense; classic good ol' boy response

It is apparent that Jon Barela's response to a complaint that
he violated NM Republican Party Rules when he chose
not to vacate his state office before contesting against other
republicans,
will be to pretend that he has not heard the complaint.

I talked on the phone with the chairperson of the NNGOP
Rules Committee, Ms. Lou Melvin, on Monday, October 6, 2008.
She made a commitment during that phone call to then call
Mr. Barela and ask him about the circumstances surrounding the
complaint.

I would argue that, unless Ms. Melvin was being deliberately
dishonest with me, that she did in fact contact Mr. Barela.
I would argue that it is fair to suppose that Jon Barela was
aware of the complaint either Monday afternoon or Tuesday.

I personally cc'd a post link to Mr. Barela on Friday.
He had, and has, every opportunity to respond to a complaint
that he is in violation of a rule that is clear on its face.

His apparent response thus far; he still hasn't heard about the complaint.

Either that, or he sees no obligation to respond to the complaint
candidly, forthrightly, honestly, and rather immediately.

Which brings us to his several obligations as one of the most
senior role models of the student standard of conduct.

The student standard of conduct would require a student
who is the subject of a complaint to step up and address the
complaint. A student is required to respond to the complaint
candidly, forthrightly, honestly, and rather immediately.

The lesson students learn from watching the leadership of the APS, is to respond to a complaint by stonewalling the issue. If the complaint goes far enough, students will witness large sums of tax dollars going to the Modrall, or some other law firm, to litigate an exception for Mr. Barela.

Why do we tell children about George Washington and the cherry tree? Why is that among the first stories that we tell them?

It is because there is no point in having rules if there is not accountability to those rules. And further that, it is to be admired when someone stands up and voluntarily accepts accountability to the rules. And further still, that there are higher standards of conduct than the lowest standard of conduct (the law) and those that hold themselves accountable to a higher standard of conduct than the law are to admired accordingly.

Which brings us back to the lesson that Jon Barela and the
rest of the good ol' boys teach students in the APS every day;
that is absolutely alright to avoid the consequences of
misconduct by any means at your disposal.

The school board teaches it to the Superintendent,
who teaches it to a myriad of mid level administrators,
who teach it to principals, who teach it to teachers,
who teach it to students.

Then we wonder why when a child is asked about their
misconduct, their first inclination is to avoid the consequences
that they have earned.

If we really want children to grow up to embrace honor and
courage and character, someone has to show them what it
looks like.

I would encourage Mr. Barela to step up as a role model.
I would encourage Mr. Barela to show staff and students what
it looks like to embrace character and courage and honor.

I expect that he will not.

I expect that he will continue to stonewall the issue until after
another election in February cements his position on the APS
Board of Education.

Then he will offer,

Oops, my bad.

... and that will be the end of it.

Obviously filing a complaint is of no consequence in enforcing
rules when one of the good ol' boys is involved.

Every generation expects the next generation to be
the first generation to hold itself honestly accountable
to meaningful standards of conduct and competence;
while they busy themselves excepting themselves from
honest accountability to any standards at all.

Every following generation then falls short of the expectation
set for them, following instead; the example that is set for them.

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

cc Jon Barela upon posting.

I say Juris Mustelidae; what do you think?

Early last week, I called the Republican Party of New Mexico
to lodge a complaint against Jon Barela.

Jon Barela just ran against at least three other Republicans for a seat on the Albuquerque Public Schools Board of Education.

The Republican party rules require sitting state officers to vacate their offices before contesting for public position against other Republicans.

Jon Barela still is the First Vice Chairman of the
New Mexico Republican Party.

Jon Barela obviously did not vacate his office.

I have received a response to my complaint;

Email written by Lou Melvin
Sent for Lou Melvin by RPNM

Mr. MacQuigg,

A friend saw my name on your blog and gave me a copy of the entry dated October 7, 2008, since I do not have e-mail.

I checked my correspondence at the Republican Party of New Mexico office, and no written or e-mailed copy of the complaint mentioned in your blog has been received for me as Rules Committee Chairman. Further, to my knowledge, no written or emailed complaint has been received by any member of the Republican Party of New Mexico Rules Committee to this date.

Please send a written copy of the complaint as you indicated in your blog as having been filed, and which was requested by me during our earlier phone conversation.

A copy of the complaint is necessary to share with the committee members before any action can be formally considered.

Lou Melvin, Chairman
Republican Party of New Mexico Rules Committee

It is as I suspected;

no action has been taken.

None can be unless and until I skip through another hoop or two.

The question is; should it make any difference at all,
how a complaint is delivered?

If the good ol' boys that "lead" the Republican Party of New Mexico, had any inclination at all to enforce the rules,
do you really suppose that they would be waiting on a complaint made in a particular format?

Did they wait on a complaint in a particular format before they crucified Fernando C de Baca?

No practical, good, and ethical purpose is served by not acting
on the complaint as submitted. It amounts to nothing but
game playing in order to weasel out of accountability.

An entire branch of the practice of law is devoted to it.

Juris Mustelidae;

Juris as practiced
by members of the weasel family,
or; legal weaselry.

An emailed complaint has been sent.

Finally the good ol' boys will be able to enforce their rules.




For the record, and on my honor;
I was assured by Ms. Melvin that in contacting her,
I had contacted the rules committee and no further action
was required of me. No request was made that the complaint
be re-submitted written form.

Day six in the adjudication of the complaint against Jon Barela

and still nothing from the good ol' boys who run the Republican
Party of New Mexico.

Still nothing on Jon Barela's apparent blatant and egregious
violation of their party rules.

Rules are for fools (and the politically powerless) apparently.

And who cares if 89,000 of this community's sons and
daughters follow his example?

Anybody at all?

"To educate a man in mind and not in morals is to educate a menace to society."

According to Theodore Roosevelt.

If one accepts the premise, then the APS is graduating about
7,000 menaces to society every year.

Why has the leadership of the APS decided, without the participation of stakeholders, to drop character education from the curriculum?

There is really only one reason; the leadership of the APS does
not want to be held accountable as role models of any standard
of conduct higher than the lowest standard of conduct of all;
the law. Truth be known, APS Modrall is not accountable even
to the law.

If these allegations are not true, how else do you explain the
abandonment of character education in APS curriculum?

There is no other explanation.

If there were, Winston Brooks would offer that explanation
right here. ________________________________.

He won't, even anonymously, because he cannot.
No one in the leadership of the APS can offer any explanation,
so they won't. They won't even talk about character education
in any forum where they might be asked to explain, defend, or
even acknowledge their abandonment of any emphasis at all on
character education.

There is not, apparently, anyone in the entire leadership of the
APS with the character and the courage to hold themselves
honestly accountable as a role model of the student standards
of conduct and competence.

This is not simply an intellectual exercise. Were there meaningful
standards of conduct and competence for anyone in the APS,
truancy would decrease, the number of drop outs would
decrease, classroom and campus misconduct and disruption
would decrease, bullying would decrease, test scores would
improve, and graduation rates would increase.

There is every reason to restore an emphasis on character
education and no reason to abandon it except for the cowardice
and corruption of the leadership of the Albuquerque Public Schools.

cc Winston Brooks upon posting.

Jon Barela ignores APS BOE Code of Ethics

Jon Barela is a member of the Albuquerque Public Schools
Board of Education, and as such subject to its code of ethics.
link

Jon Barela, only weeks into his appointment is already in
blatant violation of a number of rules.

In particular, I call attention to the following rules; each of which
is being violated by Barela.

1. Make the education and well-being of students the basis for all decision making;

4. Establish an open, two-way communication process with students, staff, families and all segments of the community;

6. Accept responsibility and accountability for one’s own actions and behaviors;

7. Avoid conflicts of interest or the appearance thereof and refrain from using the board position for personal or partisan gain;

9. Delegate authority for the administration of the schools to the superintendent and establish a process for accountability of administrators;

Jon Barela violated Rule 7 by accepting appointment to the board. The board was in need of another member who would support at least two of the board's current priorities;

1. to avoid an honest and impartial audit of the APS Modrall relationship, and
2. to conceal the nature of the good ol' boy organizational structure of the leadership of the APS.

Since Jon Barela has recent ties to the Modrall law firm, and because he is currently one of the good ol' boys himself, he has created the appearance of a conflict of interest by accepting the appointment. The appointment was absolutely unnecessary as the vacant seat would have been filled by election in a matter of weeks.

No one in the entire leadership of the APS obeys Rule 4. There is no "two way" communication. Jon Barela and the rest of his cronies in the leadership of the APS steadfastly refuse to answer legitimate questions about the public interests.

In refusing to respond to a complaint that Barela violated NM Republican Party Rules when he did not vacate his state office in that organization, when he opposed other republicans vying for the seat on the school board; Barela is in violation of Rule 6.

Jon Barela joins the rest of the leadership of the APS in obstructing an immediate full scale forensic audit of the entire leadership of the APS. Despite overwhelming and incontrovertible evidence of public corruption and incompetence in the leadership of the APS (the Meyners Audit and the public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the APS Police Department, to name but two examples), Jon Barela and the rest of the leadership of the APS refuse to begin an honest administrative accountability audit, and further refuse to explain, defend, or even acknowledge their opposition; in violation of Rules 1, 4, 6, 7, and 9.

If our interests lie in getting the 89,000 of our sons and daughters who are students in the APS, to embrace honest accountability to meaningful standards of conduct and competence,
then someone has to show them what they look like.

It will not be, apparently, Jon Barela.

For the record we are now in day five of the NM GOP's
response to the complaint that Jon Barela has violatied
republican party rules, and still no response from the
good ol' boys that run the republican party in NM.


cc Jon Barela at barela_jon(at)aps.edu upon posting.

Complaint against NM GOP Vice Chair, Jon Barela enters day 4.

Jon Barela apparently violated NM Republican Party Rules
by running against other republicans for the APS school board
seat without first vacating his state office in that organization.

We are now entering day four of the complaint process.


Justice delayed is justice denied. link

Truancy Task Force to study the problem

A task force is being formed to study truancy. link

The problem is that you can lead a horse to water, but
you can't make it drink.

Two forces work in opposition;

1. the need to pass standardized tests over material that students find disinteresting and unmotivating, and
2. the need to offer curricula that engages students and makes them want to attend school to pursue them.

A central question needs to be asked; which is better in the long run, a curriculum that can be justified in terms of testing, or an intrinsically engaging and motivating curriculum that students pursue willingly, and maybe even enthusiastically?

My personal opinion is that we are far better off engaging students in any curriculum at all (in particular in the early years) than we are by turning students off with any curriculum no matter how justifiable.

Education is a buyers market.

The buyers tend to be immature and unsophisticated in their choices. However the choice is still theirs. We can force children to sit in class, maybe, but we cannot force them to learn. We cannot even force them to cooperate except in its simplest terms.

The question may be as simple as; do we want to continue to drive students away with curricula that addresses standardized test questions, or would we rather engage them and let the test scores fall where they may?

Which is better in the long run, a truant and unsuccessful student in a traditional curriculum, or a student motivated and engaged in any other curriculum at all?

Is it more important to pass standardized tests, or to produce students who know how to learn?

Is a student who knows how to do research, who knows how to access a world of information and knows how to learn about the information they find, better or worse off than a student fighting against learning how to learn because they have no interest in what we think they need to learn?

If we can keep a particular student engaged in a curriculum rich in art and history, is it better to take advantage of that enthusiasm and create a decent human being with learning skills that will last a life time, or to drive them out of school by insisting on English and math despite their disinterest?

As a student nears graduation, and emotional maturity, they can be compelled to address any real weaknesses in their education, even though they may still lack intrinsic motivation or interest.

I would like to see this discussion contain more than a passing reference to the issue. I feel like the message is "the bridge is out" and the response is "yeah, but we're going that direction anyway."

The choice may be as simple as; engage students with a curriculum which interests and motivates them, or disengage them with a curriculum which interests and motivates us.

Allegations of criminal misconduct by senior APS leadership appear to be substantiated.

With the confirmation that there is currently an active criminal
investigation underway in the APS Police Department, link

my allegations of criminal misconduct by senior administrators
appears to be substantiated.

The leadership of the APS has now only to explain why
they have been keeping it secret from stakeholders
for these past two years.

Where is the ethically redacted truth about the
public corruption and criminal conspiracy in
the leadership of the APS?

And why will Winston Brooks not share it with stakeholders?

APS hiding lost millions

The Meyners Audit revealed that likely millions of tax dollars
have gone missing from the APS Finance Division.

Two administrators who did not blow the whistle on the
corruption and incompetence, have been promoted to
positions from which a cover up of the squandering of public
trust and treasure could be mounted.

Winston Brooks refuses to answer any questions about
the missing millions.

Winston Brooks says there is not evidence enough of
institutional and individual impropriety to warrant an honest and
impartial audit.

Winston Brooks steadfastly refuses to set a time, and a day,
and a place where he will answer legitimate questions about
the public interests in the public schools.

Complaint against NM GOP Vice Chair, Jon Barela enters day three.

Today is day three in the process of my complaint that
Jon Barela violated NM Republican Party Rules
when he ran against three other republicans without first
vacating his state office.


So far; typical good ol' boy response;

nothing.

Cc: file; Winston Brooks; Brad Winter; Andrea Trybus; Bill Reed, and Art Melendrez

Every time I make a request for public records,
APS Director of Communications, Rigo Chavez
responds and then copies his response to
APS Superintendent, Winston Winston Brooks, and
APS Chief Operations Officer, Brad Winter, and
APS Human Resources Director, Andrea Trybus, and
APS Chief of Police, Bill Reed, and
Modrall lawyer, Art Melendrez.

All of this costs taxpayers a lot of money.

Which begs the question;

Why do all of these high ranking APS administrators need
to be in the loop on refusing to provide a candid,
forthright, and honest response to my legitimate questions?

Remember the principal shuffle and the constroversy it created?

Well, there has apparently been another shuffle. link

Having learned their lesson from the last principal shuffle,
the leadership of the APS waited until almost two months
after the fact to report the movement of 15 elementary school principals.

Either that, or the million dollar a year Communications Dept.
has just been too darned busy until now, to communicate.

Two years later, APS investigation ongoing

According to APS Communications Director Rigo Chavez,
there were only three investigations done related to the public
corruption and criminal conspiracy scandal in the APS Police
Department;

1. an internal audit of APS Police Department expenditures headed by Alan Wesson, APS Director of Internal Audits, and his successor Mike Kimbrell,
2. a personnel investigation of Gil Lovato, headed by John Miera, APS Director of Staffing, and
3. an audit of the APS PD evidence room headed by Lovato's replacement Bill Reed.

According to Rigo Chavez, the audit of the evidence room is ongoing. Almost two years later, Bill Reed has not completed his investigation of the evidence room.

Bill Reed will be given the opportunity to explain why, almost two years later, he has still not completed his investigation.


cc Bill Reed, APS Chief of Police

UPDATE: at around 9 am I received a response from Bill Reed.

Bill Reed confirms that there currently is an active criminal
investigation into the evidence room at APSPD, but would
not comment on specifics.
The case will be turned over to the District Attorney’s
Office when completed.

F.W."Bill" Reed
Director Albuquerque Public Schools Police
505-243-7712 x 29
505-362-3900 Cell
505-830-0110 fax

Someone is lying; APS or Kari Brandenburg

APS Custodian of Public Records Rigo Chavez writes;

"... no records have been forwarded to the District
Attorney's Office because the investigations are ongoing."
9/22/08

District Attorney Kari Brandenburg wrote;

Mr. MacQuigg,

"... We have a file with an investigation from APS in it. Because it is an open file, I cannot disclose any more specific information." 6/26/07


and

"We cannot comment regarding specifics. The investigation is ongoing & being reviewed. It will take months before we make any decisions, as it is complex and we are working on many other things, too."

and

"Records from ongoing investigations and pending prosecutions are not subject to the Public Record Act."

Somewhere there is floating around, credible evidence of felony criminal misconduct involving senior APS administrators and Darren White's NCIC data base.

Someone is lying.

Why would Kari Brandenburg admit having records that she doesn't really have?

Why would Rigo Chavez deny sending records if they have in fact been sent?

Someone is lying.


cc superintendent(at)aps.edu

NM GOP First Vice Chairman, Jon Barela, subject of complaint

A complaint has been filed with the Rules Committee of the
New Mexico Republican Party. The subject of the complaint
is Republican Party First Vice Chairman, Jon Barela.

Republican party rules forbid sitting state officers from running
against other republicans for public office.

1-4. GENERAL - CONFLICT OF INTEREST - RESTRICTIONS

1-4-1 WHEN A PARTY OFFICER BECOMES A CANDIDATE FOR PUBLIC OFFICE

In the event the State Chairman, or any other State Officer of the Republican State Central Committee, shall file as a candidate for Public Office, and more than one Republican files as a candidate for that office, the State Officer shall immediately vacate the Party Office. In that event, the successor shall be selected in the manner for filling vacancies as in the Rules provided.

Jon Barela had at least three republican opponents to his appointment to the school board, but chose not to vacate his party office as required by the rules.

The whole process by which the (former) Modrall lawyer and APS good ol' boy, Barela was appointed to the APS school board stinks of corruption.

Two priorities of the APS school board are to avoid an honest and impartial audit of the relationship between the APS and the Modrall law firm, and hiding the nature of the good ol' boy organizational structure that leads the APS. When Modraller and APS good ol' boy Jon Barela's name was first announced, it was clear that the board intended to fill the empty board seat with their crony. link

In fact, there really was no good reason at all, to fill the vacant seat by any means but election; the scheduled election is only months away. By being appointed to the board before the election, Barela will enjoy an unearned incumbent advantage in the February election for the seat.

I expect little satisfaction from the complaint process,
good ol' boys are not known for holding each other accountable
for much of anything, but the chair of the Rules Committee,
Ms. Lou Melvin, seemed to take the complaint seriously, and
promised to get back to me after talking with Barela.

And, we shall see what we shall see.

We know where the good ol' boys are, where are the ones who are simply "good"?

Is there really not a single administrator in the entire APS
who is willing to stand up and be counted as a role model of
the student standard of conduct;

a nationally recognized, accepted, and respected code of ethical conduct?

Is there really not a single administrator in the entire APS
who actually believes that character counts?

Is there really not a single administrator in the entire APS
with the character and the courage to show students
what character and courage look like?

If we really want our children to grow to embrace character and
courage and honor, someone has to show them what it looks like.

Is there really not a single administrator in the entire APS who will show them what character and courage and honor look like?

Apparently, no.

Polishing APS' image

Winston Brooks is out in the community to polish APS' image.
APS' image is so tarnished at this point, that there is a very real
possibility that the next bond issues and mill levies will not pass.

APS spends a million tax dollars a year to polish its image.
It pays Monica Armenta $105,000 a year to polish its image.
It pays a subordinate staff hundreds of thousands of dollars
every year to polish APS' image. It slaughters uncounted numbers of trees every year, to polish APS' image.

The image polishing is deceitful and dishonest.

They are painting an image of the APS using only the colors of its successes.

While it is useful and fair and honest to point to successes, it is not honest to point only to the successes. In order to be honest, the good and the bad must be presented in fair and equal measure.

Winston Brooks and the leadership of the APS are bent on covering up the scandal in the APS Police Department. They are bent on protecting the corrupt and the incompetent in that scandal from facing any consequences at all for their corruption and their incompetence.

Winston Brooks and the leadership of the APS are bent on covering up the scandal in the APS Finance Division. Likely, millions of tax dollars have gone missing in a division

• without adequate policies,
• without adequate accountability to policies, and
• without adequate record keeping.

They are bent on protecting the corrupt and the incompetent in that scandal from facing any consequences for their corruption and their incompetence.

Just like they covered up the M&O scandal, the Gradegate Scandal, and every other aspect of the ethics and accountability scandal in the leadership of the APS.

Winston Brooks will go out in the community and blow hard about APS successes, yet he lacks the character and the courage to answer even one legitimate question about even one of APS' failures.

He and the rest of the leadership of the APS seem to think that this is OK; to promote the good and hide the bad.

According to the standard of conduct that Winston Brooks enforces upon students; the conduct is deceitful, dishonest, and therefore prohibited. That is why Winston Brooks will not discuss on the record, the student standards of conduct and competence, or the very real obligation of he, and and every other member of the leadership of the APS, to promote and model those standards.

Bottom line; taxpayers are paying a million dollars a year to be deceived and misled in order to polish the image of the APS.

Command decision making

There are too many variations in situations to make it possible to write a policy that covers every situation. There are situations where there is not time, nor it would make sense, to try to assemble stakeholders and allow them to participate meaningfully in the amendment of the policy. Command decision making is a necessary and useful tool in leadership.

However, in the APS, command decisions are not subject to review.

There is no good and ethical reason to except the decisions from review except the arrogance of the decision makers.

Take for example the "weasel clause" in the Student Behavior Handbook;

Nothing in the (Student Behavior Handbook) is intended to prevent a staff member, teacher, principal or other administrator from using his/her best judgment with respect to a particular situation.

First, let's clean up the text. The operative principle here is;

Nothing in the Student Behavior Handbook is intended to prevent a principal or other administrator from using his/her best judgment with respect to a particular situation.

Anyone who supposes that "a staff member or teacher" has the authority to exercise their own "best judgment" with respect to a particular situation, is ignorant of the workings of schools in this school district.

The phrase was written and included in the Student Behavior Handbook for the exclusive use of administrators. It was written in order that principals would not be required to assign the Minimum Mandatory Consequences for misconduct which are outlined in the Handbook. Principals are allowed, and expected, to avoid making waves with parents or in the community when consequences are assigned to students for their misconduct, and will assign the "safest" consequence available; often, no consequence at all.

The net result is that when a teacher takes a student to the administration for the assignment of consequences for misconduct; the principal is not compelled to assign the mandatory minimum consequence. And their "best judgment" is not subject to review.

The failure of the administration to assign meaningful consequences to students who misbehave, is central to their continued misbehavior. It is also central to the trend for teachers to simply ignore the misconduct rather than intervene. And student misconduct is central to the failure of schools to educate effectively.

There is no reason in this context to insulate command decisions from review except in accordance with the arrogance of this particular group of command decision makers.

In good ol' boy organizational structures, the good ol' boys are insulated from accountability to anyone except other good ol' boys. In the APS there is no system provided for subordinates who feel the need to review a command decision. No system is provided that provides a principled resolution of complaints that the command decision making authority has been abused.

The down side of all of this is that command decisions in effect, change policy. Command decisions change policy without recognizing the rights of stakeholders to participate meaningfully in policy making; fundamental stakeholder rights according to the principles of the student standard of conduct.

Either that, or the standards of conduct and competence that apply to students; the Pillars of Character Counts!, are simply a bunch of crap that is fed to students in an effort to make the leadership of the APS look good in the paper.

No one in the leadership of the APS is actually accountable as a role model of standards of conduct that respect the rights of stakeholders to participate meaningfully in policy making.

Unless Winston Brooks (and every other administrator) is honestly accountable to the student standards of conduct and competence as a role model, none of those standards is worth a hill of beans.

Winston Brooks cannot even be compelled to explain, defend, or even acknowledge that he is not accountable as a role model, though he is the senior most administrative role model in the entire APS.

His refusal to even acknowledge the question is a manifestation of (poor) command decision making.

And it is not subject to review.

If you don't like it, tough shit.
Like I said, it is not subject to review.

Think tank thinks small school are a good idea.

If you google "school size" effectiveness you get 43,000 hits.

I think; Think New Mexico might be on to something.

The Journal reports that the APS is being urged to stop building mega schools. link sub req

"The single best thing we can do is stop building these
jumbo-sized high schools which breed alienation and dropouts," said Fred Nathan,
Executive Director of Think New Mexico.

I would like to know why the leadership of the APS is
still building mega-high schools; Volcano Vista and
Atrisco Heritage Academy.

If a lot of people have known for a long time that
small schools are better than large schools, and that
small schools are actually cheaper per unit,

why is the leadership of the APS still building mega high schools?

Unfortunately, Winston Brooks chooses not to sit for questions.


Winston Brooks refuses still, to name a time, a day, and
a place where he will sit and simply tell the truth.

It is apparently none of your business
how the leadership of the APS spends your tax dollars.


They're wrong, ... right? ??

Winston Brooks is a great superintendent.

Winston Brooks is doing a great job. He really is.

Except for that one little problem; he won't tell the truth.

Winston Brooks will not set a time, a day, and a place,
where he will tell the truth about the public interests
in the public schools.

Winston Brooks will not set a time, a day, and a place,
where stakeholders can ask legitimate questions, and
he will respond candidly, forthrightly, and honestly.

Winston Brooks will not set a time, a day, and a place,
where he will;

"... model and promote
the student standard of conduct ..."

Winston Brooks will not set a time, a day, and a place,
where he will be held honestly accountable as a role model.


cc superintendent(at)aps

Is Jon Barela above the rules?

Jon Barela was the successful candidate for the APS District 7 school board seat.

Jon Barela is also an officer in the Republican Party of New Mexico, he is its First Vice Chairman.

According to the rules of the Republican Party of New Mexico
link

1-4. GENERAL - CONFLICT OF INTEREST - RESTRICTIONS

1-4-1 WHEN A PARTY OFFICER BECOMES A CANDIDATE FOR PUBLIC OFFICE

In the event the State Chairman, or any other State Officer of the Republican State Central Committee, shall file as a candidate for Public Office, and more than one Republican files as a candidate for that office, the State Officer shall immediately vacate the Party Office. In that event, the successor shall be selected in the manner for filling vacancies as in the Rules provided.

In his "race" for the school board, he was contesting
other republicans; Kathy Frazier, Arturo Candelaria, and
Mike Gibson.

Yet Jon Barela did not vacate his office as required by the rules.

In addition to the supposed rules of the NM GOP,

The school board's Code of Ethics prohibits creating
the appearance of a conflict of interest.

Unfortunately for stakeholders, the school board's code of ethics
is by their own admission; completely unenforceable.

I suspect that the rules of the NM GOP are completely
unenforceable as well.

cc the Attorney General of the State of New Mexico, and
the Secretary of State of the State of New Mexico, and
Jon Barela.


photo by Mark Bralley

Winston Brooks is getting good press

Winston Brooks is getting some good press.
KRQE has done a piece on Brooks efforts to communicate
with the community

He is out and about in the district "communicating" with
stakeholders. He will make stakeholders feel better about
the APS, because he will listen to them and their concerns
about the APS.

I would be surprised if he learns anything at all.

If he is truly worth a quarter of a million dollars a year,
he should already have a pretty good idea about what needs
to be done to improve education in the district.

If he doesn't, the millions of dollars worth of administrators
that work in the Uptown Administrative Complex, should.

Winston Brooks is spending tens of thousands of dollars and
slaying entire forests worth of trees, to shine on the public,
to supposedly "communicate" with stakeholders.

Yet when asked if he will set a time, a day, and a place,
where he will entertain legitimate questions about the APS,
and then respond to those questions candidly, forthrightly,
and honestly,

he sits there like a deer in headlights, waiting for the topic
to change.

This whole thing is just one giant manipulation.

Refusing to respond to legitimate questions in any format at all,
paints Winston Brooks, and the entire leadership of the APS
in their true colors.

APS school board adopts codes of conduct for athletic events

The board has unanimously approved new codes of conduct
for students, parents, and spectators at APS athletic events.

The new code offers no improvement over the old code;
the student standard of conduct, and adults obligations to be
role models of those standards.

If the leadership of the APS had enforced the old standards,
there would be no need for the new standards.

The only need for a new code stems from a need to divert
attention from the existing standards of conduct which also
include the obligation to be honest.

The leadership of the APS does not want to draw any extra
attention to "honesty" because it is diametrically opposite to
their current position which is;

never provide any opportunity for stakeholders to ask
legitimate questions, and then expect candid, honest, and
forthright responses.

Winston Brooks and the leadership of the APS have no interest
what so ever in being really honest with stakeholders,
hence their need to rewrite codes of conduct in order to
de-emphasize honesty in communications.

The new codes also at least one rule that no one has any
intention of enforcing; the requirement for participants to;
"... show appreciation for an outstanding play by either team ...",
and "... applaud a good effort ...".

No one is going to climb up into the bleachers and demand that
spectators root for the other team.

The board does not understand the harm done by writing rules
which are then not enforced.

They don't understand, because they routinely ignore the rules
themselves, so it doesn't seem even the least out of place.

Why is Kari Brandenburg covering for APS leadership?

The leadership of the APS promised to turn over to the DA,
credible evidence of criminal misconduct, including felony
criminal misconduct, by some senior APS administrators.

APS' Rigo Chavez now admits that, almost two years later,
APS has not turned a single document over to the DA.

When asked about the evidence that had been surrendered
to her office, instead of admitting that she was yet to receive
even one piece of evidence, Kari Brandenburg implied that
evidence had been turned over when she refused to reveal
anything about the evidence subsequent to requests for
public records.

Had Brandenburg been as candid, forthright, and honest
as the law allows, it would have become obvious more than
a year ago, the APS was still hiding credible evidence of
felony criminal misconduct from law enforcement.

Had Brandenburg been as candid, forthright and honest
as the law allows, we would not now be so close to expiring
statutes of limitations that it looks like APS good ol' boys
are going to slide on accountability for criminal misconduct.

All of which begs at least a few questions;

Must we simply accept allowing members of the privileged
class to collude to hide evidence and protect each other from
the consequences of even felony criminal misconduct?

Is there really nothing that can be done by the powerless
to hold the powerful truly accountable to meaningful
standards of conduct and competence as public servants?

Or will they simply continue to ( let each other) slide on
the consequences of even the most reprehensible misconduct?

Only one reason to hide the truth

What are stakeholders to read into the fact that the leadership
of the APS simply refuses to answer legitimate questions?

Is there a good and ethical reason not to answer questions
about the public corruption and criminal conspiracy in the
leadership of the APS (police dept)?

It has been almost two years since the scandal became public.
Stakeholders were promised that evidence would be
surrendered to District Attorney Kari Brandenburg.

According to Rigo Chavez, the evidence is still not surrendered.
A matter of weeks before statutes of limitations expire, Chavez
says that "investigations" are still underway, and that is why
the leadership of the APS has not surrendered a single document
to the District Attorney's Office.

If the leadership of the APS had the character and the courage
to answer questions, they would have to explain how such a
simple investigation could still sit undone two years later.

The obvious answer is that the good ol' boys in charge of the
investigation, are acting in the interests of the good ol' boys
who got caught with their pants down (literally).

The Meyners Audit revealed that as many as millions of dollars
have been lost or stolen in a finance division

1. without adequate policies, and
2. without adequate accountability to policies, and
3. without adequate record keeping.

And the leadership of the APS isn't answering questions about
that scandal either.

Why were two subordinates who never blew the whistle on
the shenanigans in the APS Finance Division, promoted to
positions of influence in the repair of the division, and in the
cover up of the truth about how many tax dollars have been
lost to incompetence and corruption?

Winston Brooks claims to want increased communication with
stakeholders, and increased community confidence in his
administration of the public trust and treasure.

His refusal to be candid, forthright, and honest about past
and existing problems, speaks loudly in contradiction to his
supposed goals.

APS is in real danger of not being able to pass another bond
issue or mill levy ever.

APS will be forgiven their past mistakes in particular if they
are honest about the mistakes and about the changes that
have been made to remedy them.

APS, Winston Brooks, will not be forgiven for hiding the truth.

Because there really is only one reason to hide the truth.