RGHS cure

It is time to recognize the fact that education guided by learning
and not by teaching.

We determine what we teach,
they determine what they want to learn.

You really cannot make someone learn against their will.
You really can't make a horse drink.

We have made school an unpleasant experience for students,
and then we wonder why they aren't engaged.

We wonder why they come late and leave early.
We wonder why they don't graduate, join gangs, use drugs
and fail in greater numbers than ever before.

The cure for RGHS is to figure out what these kids want to
learn about, blend it respectfully with what we want them to
learn about, and create a school they want to attend.

Start enforcing the rules.
Make sure that every "rule" is a hill worth dying on,
and then enforce the rules absolutely.

And if a kid says no, the administration owns the problem;
and I mean the administration from the top down.

It is unrealistic to expect the district's least powerful employees,
to own the districts single worst problem,
without meaningful administrative intervention.

Do we want to use teachers to help students learn,
or do we spend them on kids who don't want to learn,
and who then have nothing to do except disrupt their classes.

It isn't teaching that burns out good teachers,
it's the never getting to teach at all.

Show me the survey.

I still have not got my hands on the survey instrument that the
APS uses in the annual subordinate evaluation of principals.

I have been trying to get my hands on them since last September. link

It will show that the teachers as RGHS, or at any other school,
have never been asked what they need,
in particular with respect to student discipline.

The Council of the Great City Schools audit of the APS Police Department, revealed that statistics regarding student misconduct in schools, were routinely lied about, in an effort to protect schools' reputations.

That's why they don't survey teachers about student discipline.
They lie to protect the reputation of the APS in the community.

It's all part of APS' real Master Plan;

... hide the inconvenient truth.

The definition of crazy they say,

is to keep doing the same thing again and again,
and then to expect a different result.

Robert Lucero asked a very legitimate question;

• Given that the APS spends more money per student at RGHS than at any other high school, and
• given that APS has run its "best" principals through the RGHS administration with no measurable effect,

why should we expect this next change, to change anything?


If Winston Brooks plan to fix RGHS does not include
fixing the student discipline problems there,
his plan will fail.

Just like the same plan has failed before, many, many times.


The problem is not specific to just RGHS. The problem exists
in varying degrees in every school in the APS.

The administration is responsible for enforcing discipline policies.
They have failed to honor their obligation.

Why is this not topic for discussion?

Because good ol' boys don't talk about their failures.


You can't make them.

Winston Brooks evaluation

What kind of evaluation is Winston Brooks in for,
if it does not at some point come to;

So how'ya doing with the whole rolemodeling of
the student standard of conduct, thing?

And when he says;

Honestly, not too well.

And after they say;

No problem, we're not doing too well either.

What next?



Fortunately for the good ol' boys, the whole thing
will be done in the castle, with their guard on the door.

Public appeal for Villanucci support.

The market giant could, if he wanted to,
get hundreds of people to show up at the school board candidate forums.

Should standards and accountability be on the table
in the school board election?

Villanucci once claimed that he had laid rest a school mill levy.

I believe him.

He needs to step up again.

He needs to get hundreds of people to show up
at the school board candidate forum Thursday,
and demand that the candidates talk about legitimate issues;

• standards and accountability, including an immediate audit,
• administrative role modeling of the student standard of conduct
• student discipline issues
• the obligation of the leadership of the APS to present themselves in person, to respond to legitimate questions; candidly, forthrightly, and honestly.
  

The terms of public service are not the prerogative of the servant.
They are the prerogative of the master.

What master lets a servant respond to a legitimate question,
by saying, no comment.

Or worse still, refusing to answer altogether.

Candidates should talk about how they will respond to legitimate questions about the public interests. Will they respond candidly, forthrightly and honestly?

Or will they do what is being done now,
stonewalling on issues instead of telling the truth.



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

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

Leadership begins at the top.

Why isn't student discipline on the table?

Giant shake up at RGHS; big plans for change. link

No discussion, not even a little, about student discipline.

I suspect that, if teachers and students at RGHS
could wave a magic wand that fixed just one problem,

they would fix the way kids, and adults, behave at school.


Even if I am wrong, it is an important enough issue,
to be placed on the table for candid, forthright, and honest
discussion.

Not only at RGHS,
but in the school board elections as well.

In blatant disregard for stakeholder rights under the Pillar of Respect

Winston Brooks is denying stakeholders their right
to participate meaningfully in decision making that
affects their interests.

To wit;

Winston Brooks has a plan for Rio Grande High School.
Or, he might argue that he really doesn't have a plan.

In any case, stakeholders think he has a plan, and
they are demonstrably upset, according the Journal's
Andrea Schoellkopf. link

"APS officials met with staff from both schools Monday afternoon to quell rumors that had been rampant in the last few weeks.
"Teachers are worried," said Doug Carter, who's been teaching at Rio Grande for 10 years. "They're scared. We've been hearing about it for weeks."

Have teachers, students, and other stakeholders been allowed to participate meaningfully in the decision making process?

Students at Highland High School just delivered a petition with 500 signatures on it, protesting the change to the block schedule at HHS.

It would appear that students don't feel that they have participated meaningfully in a decision that affects their interests, either.

The student standard of conduct would not allow students
to treat adults in this matter.

Winston Brooks did not release this story to the Journal.
It didn't come out of a million dollar a year investment in
"Communications".

I sat in a policy committee meeting listening to the leadership of the APS, complaining about how the "lid blew off", and "it leaked out", and how "it got out".

They didn't include stakeholders;
they should have, and they didn't.

And they will neither explain, defend, or even acknowledge
that, that is what they have done.



This is the part where we should be talking about administrative role modeling of the student standard of conduct.

Koshmider's supervisor outed.

To make a long story short;

1. I filed a SilentWhistle complaint against APS Superintendent,Winston Brooks.
2. The compliant came back to APS and was put in the hands of Brooks' direct subordinate, APS Director of Internal Audit, one Margret Koshmider.
3. I filed a SilentWhistle complaint against Koshmider over what I consider to be her unethical handling of the complaint against Brooks.
4. Koshmider informs that; the complaint against her has been closed and, the complaint has been forwarded to her supervisor, Winston Brooks.
5. Except that at this point,we didn't know for certain that it was Winston Brooks, because on three separate occasions, Koshmider did not respond when asked for the identity of the person who closed the SilentWhistle complaint and for, the identity of her supervisor.
6. I found out that Winston Brooks is Koshmider's supervisor from APS Director of Communication, Rigo Chavez. It was no great detective work, the information was easy to obtain. Mostly I was just documenting the truth about how APS handles complaints against senior administrators, and how it handles legitimate questions about the public interests in the APS.

So what you have here is;
two legitimate complaints against Winston Brooks
have been delivered into his hands,
and nobody will say anything, to anybody, about any thing.

Or;

business as usual in the good ol' boys club they call,

the leadership of the APS.

And the real question still isn't on the table
is Winston Brooks accountable to a standard of conduct
which requires him to
hold himself honestly accountable as a role model,

or is he not?

Is Winston Brooks accountable to a standard of conduct which requires him to hold himself honestly accountable as a role model of the student standard of conduct;
the Pillars of Character Counts! a nationally recognized, accepted, and respected code of ethical conduct.

or is he not?

And why isn't this question on the table during the election
of a majority of the school board?

Why isn't it in the Journal?

Brooks secret evaluation.

School board member Marty Esquivel is an "open government"
lawyer, an expert on the law. I asked him straight out if he was satisfied that the scheduled closed meetings related to Superintendent Winston Brooks evaluation, where consistent with the requirements of the NM State Open Meetings Act.

He is satisfied that they are.

He is satisfied in part due to a weaving of the Open Meetings Act and the Inspection of Public Records Act; the two wings of the Open Government bird.

He said that the Inspection of Public Records Act SS 14-2-1-A-3, provides an exemption for

... letters or memorandums that are matters of opinion
in personnel files ...

He argued that at least part of these meetings was the equivalent of "matters of opinion".

Lawyer Esquivel must know that the NMAGO has repeatedly written that those who are asked for public records are required to;

Separate records containing exempt and nonexempt information (including redacting exempt information contained in an otherwise public record), if the records or parts of the records are exempt (§ 14-2-9).

Some parts of public records and open meetings are exempt, but you can't withhold an entire public record, or close an entire meeting, based on some part of either being exempt.

Are there no objective, concrete examples of goals and accomplishment that are more substantial than opinions?

Five years ago, the Council of the Great City Schools auditors
wrote that in the leadership of the APS

... evaluations are subjective and unrelated to promotions
or step placements ...

Years later I filed a request for any public record that showed a policy change in response to the audit.

There wasn't that record then, and there isn't that record now.
Or they would be evaluating Winston Brooks according to
objective measures now.

And they could produce examples of those objective measures
for stakeholder scrutiny.

They wouldn't have to do the whole thing in secret.

The worst thing that any public servant can do
is anything they do in indefensible secret.

Public records custodians are required to redact public records as required by the law, and then surrender the rest to public knowledge.

Those who hold open meetings are required to redact part of the meeting as required by law, and then surrender the rest to public knowledge.

No part of these meetings is open to the public,
including any discussion of items which are
not reasonably lumped with "matters of opinion".


From the Open Meetings Act, emphasis added;

A. In recognition of the fact that a representative government is dependent upon an informed electorate, it is declared to be public policy of this state that all persons are entitled to the greatest possible information regarding the affairs of government and the official acts of those officers and employees who represent them. The formation of public policy or the conduct of business by vote shall not be conducted in closed meeting. All meetings of any public body except the legislature and the courts shall be public meetings, and all persons so desiring shall be permitted to attend and listen to the deliberations and proceedings. Reasonable efforts shall be made to accommodate the use of audio and video recording devices.

(2) limited personnel matters; provided that for purposes of the Open Meetings Act [10-15-1.1 NMSA 1978], "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; provided further that this subsection is not to be construed as to exempt final actions on personnel from being taken at open public meetings, nor does it preclude an aggrieved public employee from demanding a public hearing ...

It appears to me, albeit, unskilled in Juris Mustalidae,

that at least some meaningful part of this,
must be subject to the Open Meetings Act.


cc Marty Esquivel upon posting

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. once said, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."

In the obverse;

To strike a blow against injustice anywhere,
is to strike a blow for justice, everywhere.

A case on point;

To strike a blow at public corruption and incompetence
anywhere, as in the leadership of the APS,
is strike a blow at public corruption and incompetence
everywhere, as in, Santa Fe, or
Washington DC.

Verily, it is written.*


* my father's favorite underscore

Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 7:54 AM

My first request to see the documents that prove conclusively
that teachers are not a part of district decision making. link

Now, more than a month later, and after filing a bona fide public records request,

I still don't have the public record to publish to public knowledge.

The lowest level public servant that you pay to obfuscate public records requests, makes about $70K a year (wild ass guess),

the highest level "earns" more than $250K. Plus benefits.

Winston Brooks Employment Contract

Friday, April 18, 2008

Winston Brooks' contract was hammered out in a meeting that was closed to stakeholders, and then approved at a board meeting where public input was not allowed.

1. Term 7/1/08 to 6/30/11.
2. Performance of Duties; yada, yada, yada
3. a. Cancellation of Contract; the contract may be canceled for good and just cause.
b. if Brooks is charged with a felony and which includes being under the influence of alcohol or another controlled substance, he is required to seek assistance from subordinates in the District's Employee Assistance Program. He shall direct the EAP to keep particulars secret from stakeholders. He will be allowed to resign rather than be terminated.
4. Resignation; He may resign without penalty provided he gives (90) days notice.
5. Required Documentation; He has to provide all of the proper certification, degrees and yada, yada, yada.
6. Annual Leave; 22 days off each year
7. a. Salary $250,000 a year, ($9,615.83 every payday)
b. a district car to use to and from work, $500 a month to pay dues to join community organizations, the cost of an independent review of his contract every year,
c. the board will pay his dues to professional organizations, travel, lodging, etc
8. Fringe Benefits; basically the same benefits enjoyed by all district employees, health, dental, etc
9. Retirement Annuity; an additional $1,250 dollars a month into an annuity, which increases $5,000 each school year.
10. Extension of Term; On or before January 31, 2009, the board will vote to extend, or not, the term of the contract.
11. Board Responsibilities; a. annual evaluations (which can be blown off at will, like they did for Beth Everitt last year)
b. unsatisfactory evaluations prompt an exchange of "writings" and time frames
12. District Goals, Measures, and Communication procedures to be established
13 Medical Examinations; yada yada yada
14. Liability and indemnity If Brooks is the subject of (even a legitimate) complaint, the district (Modrall?) will defend him at taxpayer expense. There is no qualifier.
15. Physical or Mental Disability; yada yada yada
16. Non-Renewal yada yada yada
17. Independent Counsel; from time to time to advise him on interpretation or applicability of the contract.
18. Arbitration. disputes will be settled by arbitration rather than litigation.
19. Severability clause; yada yada yada
20. Merger
21. Modification
22. Waiver of Breach
23. Governing Law
24. counterparts

yada yada yada

The only mention of Brooks' obligations as the senior most administrative role model of the student standard of conduct;

"Because such an occurrence would interfere with the Superintendent's responsibility to be a proper role model for students, should the Superintendent be charged with a felony which includes as an element of the offense being ;under the influence of controlled substances and/or alcohol, including charges which do not involve the Superintendent's conduct while involved in any District activity, he will be required to seek assistance from the District's Employee Assistance Program." (secret from stakeholders).

So there you have it staff, your obligation as a role model is to avoid being arrested for a felony while you are under the influence of drugs.

And by reasonable extension; the standard of conduct and competence for students is the same, no felony misconduct while you are high.

The student standard of conduct as written;

model and promote the Pillars of Character Counts;

a nationally recognized, accepted and respected code of ethical conduct and competence.

Students; your word for today is "hypocrisy".


Students,
can anyone use the word "hypocrisy" in a sentence.?

Walk the talk

There is an APS School Board Candidate Forum next Thursday evening.

Two candidates will stand up and pledge honest accountability to a higher standard of conduct than the law;

the lowest standard of conduct of them all.


What a shame it would be,
if those gentlemen made that pledge in front of an empty room.


Edmund Burke wrote;

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

What he meant was;

If no one stands up to defend standards and accountability, against those who want neither,

the leadership of the APS will remain unaccountable to any standard of conduct at all.

The leadership of the APS will continue to hide their corrupt and their incompetent from the consequences of their corruption and their incompetence.

... on your dime.

Former APS Police Chief Gil Lovato said;

if the truth ever gets out in open court,
there won't be a single APS senior administrator
left standing.

If you allow people to self except themselves
from accountability, they will; absolutely.


You pick a side, when you don't pick a side.

Ayn Rand offered;

When by your actions, you show that neither good
nor evil has anything to get from you,
which do you enable and which do you betray?

Public servants cannot be allowed
to respond to legitimate questions about the public interests
with "no comment".

• They refuse to be impartially audited and exposed to the public record.
• They refuse to talk about the costs of the infractions cited by the Meyners auditors.
• They refuse to tell stakeholders if Meyners auditors found criminal misconduct in the spending of over a billion tax dollars a year.
  
• They refuse to talk about standards and accountability.
• They refuse to talk about administrative role modeling of the student standard of conduct.
• They refuse to talk about student discipline and its effects.
• They refuse to survey teachers about what is really wrong at the educational interface;
• where the student sees the system.
• They refuse to explain why statutes of limitation are being allowed to expire on criminal misconduct by senior APS administrators. (Access Investigation results,results which are still secret from public knowledge.)

Because the tax dollars you gave to educate your children,

are being used instead, to litigate against your interests.



You have to show up,
and tell them no.

On the subject of School Board evaluations of APS Superintendents

The APS School Board is required by law to evaluate their superintendent on a yearly basis.

The APS Board ignored the law when they decided to forego Beth Everitt's final evaluation, and then passed the lemon to Aiken County without her papers.

They broke the law, and so far refuse to answer any questions about their failure evaluate Everitt for the year of Gradegate, the Chinese Fire Drill for Principals, and the Peanut Butter Gate scandal in the APS Police Department.

They will neither explain, defend, deny, or even acknowledge that they gave Beth Everitt, preferential treatment, even in violation of the law. link

Nor will they explain or defend, their upcoming decision to extend Winston Brooks' contract, even though he steadfastly refuses to set a time, a day, and a place, where he will answer legitimate questions from stakeholders, candidly, forthrightly and honestly.

With friends like these on the school board,
stakeholders hardly need enemies.

Journal editors take a stand on Brooks eval.

The APS Board of Education is scheduled to meet in secret
to evaluate APS Superintendent Winston Brooks.

They intend to keep the results secret,
except that if they decide to add a year to his already
extraordinarily long contract, they will probably admit to
having done so.

Journal editors have weighed in on extending Brooks contract.
link;

they oppose an extension.


Which illustrates the old saw;

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Still nothing from them on even one the issues of the school board election.

I would proffer; they don't know what they are,

except for the indefensible secrecy surrounding the issues,
which they wholeheartedly support,
apparently.

Journal, steps up coverage of APS school board race.

The names of the candidates have already been mentioned twice.

The Journal heaped on more coverage this morning,
two whole column inches, when they published the fact
that early voting has already begun. link

Still nothing from voters "sole source" of the information
on even one of the issues in the election.

The Journal has written heaps about "cheese sandwiches" for poor and neglected APS students, but have so far steadfastly refused to ask any of the candidates for their opinions on the fiasco.

JOURNAListic malpractice, right before your eyes.

You have to wonder why the Journal won't cover school board issues, even though they obviously know that elections are already taking place.

Wanted; Patrick J Marron

Photojournalist Mark Bralley and I ran into
APS School Board Candidate, Patrick Marron
at the NMRP State Central Committee Meeting on Saturday.

Mark snapped "booking" photos of the school board hopeful.

Patrick Marron and David Robbins link are both running for seats on the board. They are the only candidates who have responded to questions about accountability as role models of the student standard of conduct;

both have indicated that they are willing to step up as role models, holding themselves honestly accountable to the same standards of conduct and competence that they will hold up for students and staff.


No other candidate will even acknowledge that they have heard the question;

which by the way, is the same response you get to the question, if you ask it of sitting school board members or the superintendent.

It is never too soon to start thinking about

where will you be Thursday evening between 6 and 8 pm.

It is harder to imagine a better place than
the APS School Board Candidate Forum.

I don't know what else to say.


It's dance time.

Credentialing the free press

The question is;

If the free press is subject to
subjective "credentialing",

is it really free?

You can build a number of very good arguments that
Mark Bralley should have been allowed to attend the second
secret meeting at the NMRP Central Committee Meeting.

Not the least of which is the promise made by the Republican Party itself;

The Republican Party is open and accessible to all Americans.

Bralley, a retired police officer, and the stud on the right, has American credentials enough to attend that meeting.

Bralley, has human rights credentials enough, by definition.

Bralley, has free press credentials enough.

The free press itself, has credentials enough;

• The free press is credentialed by definition.
• The free press is credentialed on its face.
• The free press is credentialed by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America,
• The free press is credentialed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Mark Bralley had credentials enough to be there.




Did NMRP
Executive Director,
Whitney Cheshire have
authority enough
to demand that he produce them,

much less
the authority to
deny them?


Show us the warrant.





photo Mark Bralley

Thank you Michael Meyer

for walking the talk.

How can we expect honest politicians

to be offered up by dishonest means?

Secret meetings

We the people have unimaginable amounts of power and resources.

We were told a long time ago,
that the power and resources that are fundamentally our own,
could only be spent by first entrusting them to others;

others meaning, public servants.

And then when we ask them;

What are you doing with our power and resources?

They say;

It's a secret.

The Republican Party promises to be open and accessible to all Americans.

Yet when asked to codify that promise, to curtail the calling
of meetings that are held in secret from stakeholders,
the NMRP Central Committee voted to continue the status quo.

Had they not, it wouldn't have made a bit of difference.
The outgoing NMRP Chairman, Allen Weh,
stood up at a microphone, and told the committee;

If they made any rule against secret meetings,
the executive council would disobey it;
deliberately and with forethought.

And after that, another secret meeting was called.

I am told the the meeting was not secret, it was "closed".

I would argue that the meeting was "closed" precisely
to keep it "secret".

Secret from stakeholders.

The worst thing any public servant can do,
is anything they do in indefensible secret.


Who in their right mind,

would give over the control over their power and resources,

to people who think they can respond with "no comment"

to legitimate questions about how the power and resources
are being spent.



Secret meetings will not end as the result of secret decision making.



Secret meetings will end
when there are enough stakeholders standing at the door
demanding to be let in.


Or they will not end at all.

You pick a side, when you don't pick a side. unk

New Republican Party Chairman owes the party an apology

The ink wasn't even dry on Harvey Yates election to the
NMRP chairmanship,

when the second secret meeting of the day was called.

Despite a promise written in stone;

BE IT RESOLVED, That the Republican Party is the party of the open door. Ours is the party of liberty, the party of equality of opportunity for all and favoritism for none.

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

Photojournalist and blogger, Mark Bralley reports his ejection from a post election, party meeting. link

So this is the new Republican Party?

It looks just like the old Republican Party.

I gotta say, I am really disappointed.

The New Mexico Republican Party State Central Committee
met today to decide to maintain the status quo.

They like the rule of the gavel
more than they like Robert's Rules of Order.

It bothers me that the decision was driven by ignorance.

Somebody got up and told people it would cost $500 a meeting
to adopt Robert's Rules of Order.

And I guess people believed him.

He also argued that, to adopt Robert's Rules of Order was to enable the bad guys to take over meetings because they are the only ones who know the rules.

And I guess people believed him.

Someone else argued that the state had no right to tell the county, precinct and ward bosses how to run their meetings.

And I guess people like to be bossed around at the county, precinct and ward level.


No one suggested a better alternative than adopting Robert's Rules.


They were so bent on cutting of their nose to spite their face,
that they voted in favor of continuing the Rule of the Gavel.

What were they thinking?

Why was such an important issue as the adoption of Robert's Rules allowed only 3 1/2 minutes of explanation and defense?

Why were candidates given only three minutes?

Was there no part of that meeting that could have been
truncated in favor of more important business?

They were offered the opportunity to codify their right to know about decision making that affects their interests.

They decided instead, to leave that issue in the hands of people who stood right up and said;

If you make secret meetings against the rules,
we'll just take them outdoors and have them anyway.

That one was explained and defended in 3 1/2 minutes as well.

I listened to one person after another talk about higher standards of conduct, and not one of them talked about how they would hold themselves honestly accountable to a higher standard of conduct.


It bears noting that;
Jon Barela could not have done a better job
of moving the agenda, and quieting a large room
with a fair number of people who insisted upon carrying on
too lengthy and too loud conversations in the back of the room.

But still.

Before the meeting today, I was looking forward to becoming more active in the Republican Party.

Now, not so much.

There exists, in the public record, two documents

One is an (APS) police report. On its bottom it reads in effect;
this is a sworn document, you lie under penalty of perjury.

The other, is a page of the transcript of my arbitration hearing
before former New Mexico State Supreme Court Chief Justice
William Riordan link.

The transcript is of testimony given under oath,
again subject to the penalty of perjury.

The incident report and transcript are the testimony of then
APS Director of Risk Management, Richard Cangiolosi.

The sworn statements are contradictory.

In truth, neither is the truth,
which has been and can be verified again by polygraph.

Even if one were the truth, the other is not.
Except perhaps under the rules of Juris Mustelidae;
legal weaselry.

If these are not together, incontrovertible evidence of felony
criminal perjury, what is?

I was paid a few tens of thousands of dollars, gross,
in part, to promise that I would never hand those two
documents to any agency of law enforcement.

Tax dollars were used to buy exception to the law, for a senior
APS administrator
for felony criminal misconduct.

Paid for, with unwitting taxpayer support of "education".

As is being done right now with respect to the public corruption
and criminal criminal conspiracy in the APS Police Department.
circa late 2006, early 2007.

Two years later, and weeks from the expiration of statutes of
limitation,

taxpayers are paying lawyers,

who work for Paula Maes husband's law firm,

to hide the Access Investigation report from public
knowledge and criminal prosecution.

Taxpayers are paying to hide felony criminal misconduct
involving senior APS administrators.
Journalink and
link to "private investigations", and
DA Brandenburg /Access Investigations link.

DA Brandenburg and APS Custodian of Public Records,
Rigo Chavez are on the record offering contradictory versions
of the supposed public record.

Brandenburg claimed that the reason she has never closed the case because it was growing increasingly more complicated and requiring much more investigation; (on her KKOB radio talk show.)

Yet, a public records request for any document that showed even one "billable hour" of actual investigation was ignored.

Rigo Chavez is on record admitting that after two years, and within weeks of the expiration of criminal statutes of limitation, that he cannot a produce a public record of any transfer of evidence at all. He admits that nothing has been sent because the investigation is "still underway".

Tax payers will pay lawyers to continue hide the evidence until after a few of the good ol' boys have cashed in their get of of jail free cards.


And, I am told that there is less problem with using tax dollars
to buy exception to the law for good ol' boys,

than there is a problem with my taking those dollars.

I am told that I should not have accepted their offer;
it's all my fault.

Honorable people can be coerced into apparently dishonorable conduct. Who of us can judge whether another man suffered enough, before giving finally giving in?

However grievous my misconduct,
it is not so grievous as allowing the same thing to happen
ever again.

... much less again, and again, and again.

The stigmatization of kids w/o lunch money

The Journal reported on a vote taken by the school board link
on the subject of APS' plan to shame children into forcing their
parents to pay their lunch tab.

One board member who voted to continue the plan,
argued that the "poor" line could be, would be,
kept secret from other students.

I wondered aloud, how much time this person had spent
on an elementary or middle school campus.

Tell me about any embarrassing tidbit about any elementary
or middle schooler that is not widespread knowledge by the
end of the first recess.

Whatever the best solution is; it cannot seriously depend on
the hope that children's secrets will be kept and that they will
not be stigmatized.

Again, I would have to suggest, that of all the places where
money could be saved, why start here? where there lies
the greatest potential for embarrassing innocent children.

Voting in favor of cheese sandwiches; Barela, Esquivel, Lucero, and Maes.

Voting against; Facio, Griego, and Martin.

If asked for my "credentials" as a member of the press.

I will aver;

I am a member of the free press.

The free press is credentialed by definition.

The free press is credentialed on its face.

The free press is credentialed by the First Amendment
to the Constitution of the United States of America.

The free press is credentialed by the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states:

"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference, and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers"

... so there.

Transparency vs. Privacy and Security

This is 5 pg essay on creating institutional transparency.

It is an excellent read.


link

Imagine a machine.

We will call it an autonomous accountability robot droid thing.

Once switched on, it will relentlessly ferret out incompetence and corruption.

The question is not
if corruption and incompetence will be exposed,
the question is only how quickly.

Once turned on, it cannot be turned off.

Building this machine is a piece of cake,

compared to finding some brave sum bitch
with with character and courage enough, to switch it on.


The question is not can an audit be designed
that will ferret out corruption and incompetence,

the question is;
will some brave sum bitch ever order one up?


The Magic 8-Ball link sez;

in your dreams

Upton Sinclair wrote;

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

Every generation, expects the next generation,
to be the first generation, that holds itself honestly accountable
to some meaningful standard of conduct.


... with dismal result.

White lies

A white lie is a deliberate deception in the best interests of the person being deceived.

If there is such a thing as a small lie, it is not a white lie for that same reason.


At least that's what we're telling the 87,000 of our sons and daughters in the APS.

T H Lang lives!

I have been emailing Alb. Journal publisher T. H.Lang for
the longest time, begging him to cover the APS ethics and
accountability scandal.

He has always stonewalled in response.

So I never knew for sure if he had read my email,
or even if his body temperature was still above ambient.

Today he wrote about how bad he feels about having to lay off good people at the Journal.

Because he can't sell newspapers.

In part, because he won't investigate and report upon
the lack of standards and accountability in the APS.

And why would anyone want to buy a newspaper
that won't tell the truth.

Even on the eve of elections?

Mesa Del Sol wants nothing to do with the APS

In this morning's Journal, link, it is reported that the off again,
off again, relationship between Mesa Del Sol and the APS is
off again. (when was it ever really on?)

And who can blame them?

Who would want to partner up with a school district
who's biggest problem and highest priority is covering up
an ethics and accountability scandal in its leadership?

It's a no brainer if ever there was one.

Shhhhhhh! It's a Silent update:

I have received an email update on the SilentWhistle complaint against APS' Director of Internal Audit, Margret Koshmider.

Quoted in significant part, read;

Tuesday, December 23, 2008 at 9:35 AM by
Albuquerque Public Schools

This SilentWhistle has been closed.

Still nothing from Koshmider herself in response repeated requests for the identity of the person who closed the complaint and, the identity of her supervisor.

Diogenes costume

On two occasions I went to board meetings masked
as "the elephant in the room".
I was illegally arrested on the second occasion,
and I would not suffer another; so there you are,
no more elephant mask.

It just occurred to me that at some meeting
I could come dressed as Diogenes with a lamp and staff.



And then it occurred to me that, except for the lamp and staff,
Diogenes walked around naked.

wikilink

Innocent, until proven guilty.

With regard to the current upset over the seemingly endless and incontrovertible evidence of a culture of corruption in public service at every level of government;

There are those who would argue that nobody has been convicted of anything.

Never the less,
people's overall faith in the goodness of their government has been diminished.



The law reads;

creating the appearance of a conflict of interest is prohibited.

It is written so,
in recognition of the difficulty in proving the substance of conversations that took place in smoky back rooms,

and in recognition of the fact that damage has been done by creating the appearance of a conflict of interest.


An opportunity presents itself;

Public servants; accountable to meaningful standards of conduct and competence.

Honestly accountable, accountable under systems that are impartial and powerful enough to hold even them accountable, even against their will.

All we have to do is insist upon it.

They are after all, our servants.


There is a School Board election coming up.
And the good ol' boys don't want to answer any questions about standards and accountability, on the record.

There are only two school board candidates willing to be held accountable for their character; Patrick Marron and David Robbins link.

They have said that they will sit still and answer legitimate questions, candidly, forthrightly, and honestly; the same standard of conduct that they will hold up for students and staff. They have said that they will lead by their personal example.

There are two candidates for important political office,
who are willing to be held accountable to a standard of conduct that requires honesty.

That in itself, is historic.


But still not newsworthy.


This is JOURNAListic malpractice;
of the worst kind
and right in front of your eyes.

Kent Walz is a Journal editor who has the authority to authorize an investigation of credible allegations of an ethics and accountability scandal in the leadership of the APS.

At the very least, he has the authority to tell us why he will not investigate and report upon those allegations.

Should you care to communicate your interest in that investigation, his email address is; kwalz(AT)abqjournal.com


cc Kent Walz upon posting.

I ask again, where in the hell is the teachers union? ??

Having searched the Albuquerque Teachers Federation website, link, I can find no indication that the teachers union gives a rat's ass about the outcome of the February 3rd School Board elections.

This is unfortunate because there is at least one candidate who is willing to do something about out of control students, administrative accountability, transparency, and a wealth of other issues that are vitally important to teachers.

Early voting begins this week, and apparently, the ATF is prepared to sit back and do nothing.

Shouldn't they be telling teachers? that

there are two candidates willing to put student discipline on the table for honest discussion,

and who are willing to give teachers a seat at the table where the decisions about student discipline will be made.?

cc ATF upon posting.

APS Director of Internal Audit continues stonewalling.

APS Director of Internal Audits Margret Koshmider is the subject of an ethics complaint filed with APS' Fraud, Waste, and Abuse Hotline.

She has been accused of denying due process to a complaint filed against APS Superintendent Winston Brooks.

Koshmider has indicated that the complaint against her was relayed to her supervisor and then closed (without the required entry on the SilentWhistle site.

Since then, she has ignored two requests to identify her supervisor, and to identify the person who took it upon themselves to close the complaint against her.

Submitted as evidence that the APS Fraud, Waste, and Abuse Hotline is itself a fraud; a waste of tax dollars, and an abuse of the public trust.

Winston Brooks obligations

In the strictest sense, the superintendent is accountable only to the school board.

School board members are accountable for their selection of the superintendent, at election.

In order for voters to hold school board members accountable for their conduct and competence with respect to the employment of a superintendent, they have to know of the conduct and competence of their superintendent.

If the details of the conduct and competence of a Superintendent are kept secret from stakeholders, how are they to hold anyone accountable for anything?

Winston Brooks owes stakeholders a candid, forthright, and honest appraisal of his successes and his failures. He owes stakeholders a response to a legitimate question;

What have you done since taking administrative control over the APS, that speaks to your conduct and competence as the Superintendent of the APS?

The School Board as well, owes stakeholders candid, forthright, and honest responses to a few legitimate questions;

How has the Superintendent that you have hired, performed.?
Are you satisfied or unsatisfied?
What do you intend to do about your (dis)satisfaction?

A useful tool in evaluating the conduct and competence of a chief administrative officer, is an independent audit of their administration; a full scale standards and accountability audit.

It is an useful enough tool that a Superintendent's contract should should contain provisions for firing a superintendent who cannot manage to create the circumstances that lead to a clean audit.

Yet, neither the Board nor the Superintendent will answer
questions about the first Annual APS Administrative
Standards and Accountability Audit.

They will neither explain, defend, deny, nor even acknowledge their decision to prevent an audit.

And the Journal will allow the board elections to begin without writing a word about it.


Paula Maes constituents deserve to know the Paula Maes stood on the record and said that she would never allow any audit that named the corrupt and incompetent by name.

Mary Lee Martin's constituents deserve to know that Mary Lee Martin refuses to be held honestly accountable as a role model of the student standard of conduct, a standard that she herself, voted to adopt.

And what about their opponents? What if they wanted to tell voters that they would behave differently? How can the Journal justify keep this information secret from them?


How can the Journal's steadfast refusal to investigate and report upon the ethics and accountability scandal in the leadership of the APS

through another board election, through more school bond elections, and through more mill levy elections

except in an effort to cover up the systemic lack of standards and accountability in the leadership of the APS?

Winston Brooks secret evaluation

According to the Journal, Winston Brooks will receive his
first evaluation by the APS Board of Education. link

Based on this evaluation, Brooks' contract will be extended
for a year beyond the unusually long 3 year contract
which he has already.

When the board evaluates a superintendent, they are
in a very real sense, also evaluating themselves.
When they give Winston Brooks a clean bill of health,
they write one for themselves as well.

The results will be kept secret from stakeholders.
How are stakeholders to evaluate their superintendent or
their school board if all of the pertinent information is kept
secret?

This board has a history of problems with superintendent evaluations and telling the truth. link and link.


Keeping the results secret from stakeholders serves
self interests at the expense of public interests.

There are some glaring problems already, not the least of which is the fact that Winston Brooks will not answer legitimate questions about the public interests.

Among those questions;

1. Why are he and the rest of the administration refusing to be held honestly accountable as role models of the student standard of conduct, if only for the few hours each day that they enforce those standards upon students?
2. Why is the phrase;

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

   no longer a part of the code of conduct that applies to administrators and board members?
   
3. Why has the leadership of the APS taken two years to investigate felony criminal misconduct in the APS Police Department, allowing statutes of limitation to expire and good ol' boys to except themselves from accountability for criminal and ethical misconduct?
4. Did Meyners auditors uncover criminal misconduct in their investigation of the APS Finance Division?
5. Why were employees of the APS Finance Division, who never blew the whistle on the blatant and egregious problems reported by the Meyners Audit, promoted to positions from which they could cover up their own incompetence and corruption?
6. How many tax dollars were lost because of inadequate policies, inadequate accountability, and inadequate record keeping on the spending of more than a billion tax dollars a year?
7. What was the effect on APS' bond rating, and cost to taxpayers, of the results of the fallout from the Meyners Audit?
   
8. How much money has the leadership of the APS spent on the Uptown Administrative Complex, including a completely unjustified new board room, while saving money by ending fire safety inspections in schools?
9. Why won't the APS tell the truth about the million dollar relationship between the APS and Paula Maes husband's law firm; Modrall?
10. Is the record of APS Modrall litigation, so expensive that the total cost is secret, one of excepting senior APS administrators and Board Members from accountability to the law?
    
11. Why is there no written Discipline Philosophy to support district discipline policies?
12. Why has the leadership of the APS never surveyed teachers about the problems they face everyday in schools?
13. Why has no data been collected that documents the negative effect of chronically disruptive students on the education of all students?
    
14. Why is the APS website unimproved after years of complaints? Why is it impossible to find relevant information? Why is there so little transparency?
    
15. Why is the record of the APS Custodian of Public Records, one of routinely obfuscating the surrender of public records to public knowledge?
16. Why is APS spending money on the SilentWhistle; fraud, waste, and abuse hotline, when it is demonstrably a scam designed to give stakeholders a false sense of protection?
    

Winston Brooks has repeatedly refused to meet with stakeholders and answer legitimate questions, candidly forthrightly and honestly. His meet and greets with stakeholders were a sham; he never allowed the asking of any questions except his own.

According to audits by the Council of the Great City Schools;

• Administrative evaluations are subjective and unrelated to promotions or step placement, and
• Anyone who tries to buck the system falls victim to "... a culture of fear of retribution and retaliation..."

Every independent audit of any division of the leadership of the APS has revealed widespread and deeply rooted incompetence and corruption. Audits have pointed out that the leadership of the APS routinely ignores audit results. Even a bonafide request for public records could not turn up any evidence that policy changes were made as a result of audit findings.

And when asked an inconvenient question on any issue at all,
the response is always the same; stonewalling.

APS is run by a good ol' boys club. It always has been, and
apparently it always will be.

The good ol' boys that the run the Journal steadfastly refuse to report on the Ethics and Accountability Crisis in the leadership of the APS. The Journal steadfastly refuses to report on the school board elections, the candidates, or any of the issues that have compelled them to run for election.


For what it is worth, the editors of the Journal have taken a stand on school lunches. link

A few days after the election, the editors will take another stand
on apathetic voters and their failure to involve themselves in issues or elections.

Two full pages in the Journal on "Schools" today

And still nothing substantial about the February 3rd School
Board Elections.

The exception; 6 column inches in the Metro section, reminding voters that today is the last day to register to vote in that election. In fairness, the Journal did re-mention candidates names, but nothing else. Two candidates have dropped out of the race since filing day; Leonard DeLayo link and Michael Swisher.

Covering election issues is one the main reasons for the existence of newspapers.

If the Journal is not actively engaged in covering up substantial issues in the election, how else can their refusal to cover the election issues be explained? Could this be as simple as the Journal enjoying APS' advertising revenues? Did someone tell the Journal that if they spill the beans, their gravy train will leave the tracks?

NM Repblican Party Central Committee Members to pick sides.

At a meeting this coming Saturday, an amendment to the NMRP Rules will be voted upon.

The amendment provides that deliberative meetings of the NM Republican Party will be run under Robert's Rules of Order.

No one should speak against the adoption of Roberts' Rules,
except in favor of a better set of rules.

Because if anyone votes against the amendment,
they are voting in favor of the status quo;
meetings ruled by the gavel;

meetings where they, or anybody else, can be
thrown out of the meeting for asking a legitimate question,

and have it all explained away with the unmitigated arrogance
of saying;

"My bat, my ball ..." you lose
(your right to participate meaningfully in decision making
that affect your interests.)

I doubt that there is a better set of rules to protect the
powerless in a meeting, than Robert's Rules.


I do know for certain that, the Rule of the Gavel is not one.

APS' "Fraud, Waste, and Abuse Hotline" is a fraud.

APS is paying who knows what, to a company called SilentWhistle as an integral part of its Fraud, Waste, and Abuse Hotline.

The whole thing is a fraud;

deceit, deliberate trickery, perpetuated to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage, calculated to deceive another, a misrepresentation of some material fact that is made with knowledge of its falsity, or in reckless disregard of its truth.

APS, in the December Perspective, promised stakeholders that "unethical" behavior could be reported to SilentWhistle, with the implied promise that complaints would see a principled resolution.

Instead, we find that SilentWhistle is nothing more than a mailbox which forwards complaints to those against whom the complaints are made.

I made a legitimate regarding Winston Brooks' unethical refusal to be held honestly accountable to ethical standards of conduct; specifically that he refuses to be held honestly accountable as a role model of APS' Student Standards of Conduct; a nationally recognized, accepted and respected code of ethical conduct.

SilentWhistle forwarded the complaint to Margret Koshmider, APS Director of Internal Audit. She disposed of the complaint unethically; without due process.

I filed a complaint against her with SilentWhistle. SilentWhistle sent my complaint directly to the person against whom I made the complaint. She claims, in a letter to SilentWhistle, that she forwarded the complaint to her "supervisor". I asked her to identify her supervisor, and she is yet to respond.

I suspect that she reports to Winston Brooks, which means; my complaint that she did not afford due process to a complaint against Winston Brooks, was forwarded to Winston Brooks. If that is true, then Winston Brooks will decide if a complaint against him was properly dismissed or not.

APS School Board Policy prohibits creating the "appearance of a conflict of interest".

This goes way beyond the "appearance" of a conflict of interest, it is a conflict of interest.

APS' Fraud, Waste, and Abuse Hotline, is a fraud. It is also a waste. It is also an abuse of the public trust.

And we still don't know how much taxpayer unwitting support of "education", is being spent to perpetuate the fraud. It could be thousands, it could be tens of thousands of dollars.

I suspect that at least two candidates for the school board would take issue with this fraud.

They would take issue publicly,
if only the Journal did that kind of thing.

APS has a Chief Administrative Officer

He is Superintendent Winston Brooks.

It is his responsibility to ensure that there are adequate standards of conduct and competence for all of his subordinates. It is his responsibility to ensure that there is honest accountability to those standards.

The easiest and most accurate and honest method to evaluate standards and accountability is to hire impartial auditors to investigate and report upon both. It would be called an administrative standards and accountability audit.

Reasonably, the Superintendent's contract would include satisfactory performance on an annual audit.

There is no reason not to conduct such an audit right now, except that the administration of the APS would fail the audit, and the need to keep that fact secret from stakeholders.

Reasonable questions, that speak directly to two of the three responsibilities of the school board;

1. policy making, and
   
2. hiring a superintendent

and which should be put to the candidates for the school board are then;

1. Will you create a policy that requires annual impartial administrative accountability audits? and
2. Will you make satisfactory performance on those audits, an integral part of the decision making process surrounding the renewal of the Superintendent's contract?

If not, why not?

Where are the public forums for the school board elections?

Will the February 3rd school board election, and the attendant issues be kept entirely secret from voters?

It is a fair question.

As far as I know, there is not a single public forum scheduled.

The Journal, 3 days before early voting begins, has yet to do anything beyond identifying the candidates on filing day, late last month.

I can see why incumbents Paula Maes and MaryLee Martin would rather not answer any questions in public, about the many problems that have occurred on their watch;

1. How many tax dollars have gone missing in the APS Finance Division due to their inadequate standards, accountability,and record keeping?
2. Was there criminal misconduct revealed by the scathing audit by Meyners and Co?
3. Why is APS spending a secret? How many tax dollars have been wasted at the Uptown Administrative Complex and on other boondoggles?
4. Why won't they support an impartial audit of administrative standards and accountability?
5. Why has two year old evidence of felony criminal misconduct in the leadership of the APS (police department) still not been surrendered to the DA's office?
6. Why are the records of the relationship between Paula Maes' husband's law firm, Modrall, and the millions of tax dollars funneled to it, secret from public knowledge?
   
7. Why have these two board members repeatedly refused accountability as role models of the student standard of conduct?
8. Why won't these two board members agree to meet with stakeholders for the purpose of answering their legitimate questions?

Why isn't Paula Maes going to have to publicly defend her opposition to any audit that names corrupt and or incompetent administrators and board members by name?

Why isn't MaryLee Martin going to have to publicly defend her failure to prevent the second major corruption scandal in the APS Police Department, during her tenure on the school board?

I can see why Paula Maes and MaryLee Martin would hide from these questions and others. I just can't see why anyone else would rather the whole thing be kept secret from voters.

Certainly not their opponents. What about their right to have their positions, ideas, and ideals presented to voter stakeholders by the Journal?

Do voters have a right to know that at least two candidates would press for an immediate, impartial, full scale audit of the leadership of the APS; a diametrically opposite position from their opponents?

Do voters have a right to know that at least two candidates have stated on the record, that they are willing to be held honestly accountable as role models of the student standard of conduct, including the requirement to answer any legitimate question candidly, forthrightly and honestly?

How can the folks that run the Journal, justify their failure to ask important questions and share the responses with voters?

What more important service does a newspaper provide for
democracy, than fully informing voters?

Is the leadership of the Journal corrupt?
or merely incompetent?

Another School Board candidate steps up.

I had the pleasure of meeting school board candidate
Patrick J. Marron.

He is running in APS school board district 7.

Suffice it to say that when asked if he would be willing to be
held honestly accountable to a higher standard of conduct
in his service on the board, he answered; yes.

And when asked, do you understand that that means
telling the truth; answering legitimate questions, candidly,
forthrightly and honestly, he answered; yes.

District 6 candidate, David Robbins link,
answered both questions the same way.

So now we have the potential to have one school board member offer a motion that will establish honest accountability to meaningful standards of conduct and competence in the administration of the APS, and another to second the motion.

This is monumental.

There is not currently, even one board member with the character and the courage to even talk about character and courage.

Voting begins this week.

So far, the Journal has decided not to cover the race.

It is apparently,
not newsworthy.

"2010 Gov.'s Race May Be the One To Watch"

According to the editorial in this morning's Journal. link

The Journal editors are trying to gin up interest in the 2010 gubernatorial race between Heather Wilson and Diane Denish.

Ginning up;

1) To create or arouse strong feelings in (someone); move or excite.
2) To fabricate, invent or concoct (something), typically with deceitful intent.

On the other hand, voting begins this week in the APS School Board Election. And so far, not a word from the editors, and not a word from the Journal's education reporter.

I have it on good authority,
that the candidates have not heard a word from the Journal.
They have not been asked one single question,
they have not been asked for anything at all.

Votes will be cast before anything at all appears in the Journal.

We will hear from the editors on the subject of the school board elections, eventually. Some morning, a day or two after the election, Journal editors will berate voters for not showing up at the polls, for not giving a damn enough to even vote.

Shame on the Journal editors, and shame on whomever at the Journal, whose decision it is; not to cover the school board election. Shame on whomever at the Journal, who decided that fundamental and serious issues in the upcoming election will not be laid out for voters to discuss.

Voters in Albuquerque depend on the Journal. There is no other publication that voters look to, more than they look to the Journal for the information that they need to vote knowledgeably and intelligently.

Yet the Journal will give them nothing.

President of the New Mexico Broadcasters Association, and
school board candidate Paula Maes, would rather that the issues not be placed on the table. She would rather not be asked about administrative role modeling of the student standard of conduct. She would rather not be asked about the multimillion dollar relationship between her husband's law firm, the Modrall, and the APS.

What the Journal is doing, is called journalistic malpractice.

They could actually be sued for what they are doing.

Not that any board candidate has the power and resources
to successfully sue them.

So they, the Journal and the candidates with something to hide,
will prevail, just like any bully prevails in an environment he controls.

Shame on the Journal.
Really, shame on them.


cc Journal editors, and Journal Education Reporter
upon posting

Herding cats, or one on one?

(This post has been extensively rewritten and republished
with a necessarily inaccurate date and post time.)

It is hard to imagine a situation more ideal than a pupil/teacher
ratio of one to one.

In truth, very few students really need a full time teacher.

Some can handle two to one, four to one; thirty to one,
or as in a sociology class at the UNM, 600 to 1.

It has to do with the ability to learn independently.

Independent learning depends heavily on self discipline.

Students are not acquiring self discipline enough to learn alone.

When Character Counts! was unanimously adopted by the
board in 1994, it was with the understanding that it was to
become part of the curriculum.

It was understood that students would learn how to behave
and develop character enough to want to.

They have not acquired that knowledge and character,
because they have never had role models in the leadership of the APS.

The leadership of the APS is not, and never has been accountable to the same standards of conduct that they established and enforce upon students; not even for the few hours each day that they are enforcing them upon students.

The leadership of the APS can not enforce a discipline policy
on students, because they will not enforce one upon themselves.



There is no written discipline philosophy for the APS.
If there was, they could point to it.
There is no written set of commonly shared beliefs,
that the leadership of the APS is obligated to enforce.

There are only poorly crafted and often conflicting policies
that are unenforceable by those with control over the
least amounts of power and resources.

Consider for example the issue of sagging.

The administration banned sagging and then did nothing to stop it. There is not a secondary school in the district, where you will not see sagging;
the permission of prohibited behavior.

This is not about sagging. link

It is a teacher's responsibility to tell a child to stop misbehaving.
It is an administrative problem, when the child says no.

The leadership of the APS is completely unaccountable for
student discipline problems in schools; problems which are
a major impediment in educating children effectively and efficiently.

They cannot even be compelled to tell the truth about the problem.

If the data were gathered, it would prove that the leadership
of the APS has failed to carry their fair share of the burden
of maintaining order and an educationally efficient environment.

That is why they don't gather it.


And every year, we need more and more teachers to babysit more and more chronically disruptive students.

But we don't get more and more teachers every year,
so the net effect is that; static pupil teacher ratios
are increasingly ineffective and inefficient.

Graduation rates, drop out rates, truancy rates, discipline problems in schools, graduation rates, ... all depend on student discipline.

Yet the leadership of the APS will not name a time, a day, and a place, where they will sit and answer legitimate questions about their failure to maintain order in schools.

In fact, they will not name a time, a day, and a place, where they will sit and answer legitimate questions about anything.

This should be an issue in the upcoming school board elections; one month away.

If is is not, it is because the Journal, KRQE, KOAT, KOB, KKOB have decided that it will not be.

It is, apparently,

not newsworthy.