Esquivel renews attack on charter schools

A few weeks ago, the leadership of the APS got spanked by State Auditor Hector Balderas, link, over audit irregularities primarily involving charter schools. They responded by grossly overstepping their authority by demanding an immediate surrender of certain bookkeeping records under threat of revocation of their charters.

The Secretary of NM's Public Education Department stepped in to mediate/referee/guide them to a peaceful resolution of the dispute. The hearing didn't go well for APS' leadership; APS Supt Winston Brooks was so chagrined by the ruling, he lost control while leaving the meeting, link; embarrassing himself and the district.

Well, apparently, School Board President Marty Esquivel can't take "grow up" for an answer, and he wants some payback against one of the charter school principals who handed him his ass at the NMPED meeting.

Now he and his cronies at the Journal, have launched another attack on charters principal and superintendent, Scot Glasrud, link. Esquivel thinks Glasrud is making too much money.

The truth is, it is none of Esquivel's business how much Glasrud makes; that is between Glasrud and his stakeholders. They, by way, could not be happier with his success at three charters he heads.

It is telling that Esquivel, and his Journal cronies, think the newspaper is the proper place to discuss Glasrud's salary, but not the place to discuss openly and honestly, the half million dollar golden parachute, link, he and the APS Board have provided for Winston Brooks .

The Journal and Esquivel tried to downplay Glasrud's success at the charters; pointing to different demographics. Yet if you correct for the demographic differences, Glasrud's schools still out perform equivalent APS schools by a substantial margin.

Esquivel is throwing rocks from a glass house; the ongoing ethics and accountability scandal, the suppression of evidence of felony criminal misconduct involving APS administrators, widespread failure to educate, widespread student discipline issues, his own abdication as the senior most role model of the APS Student Standards of Conduct, unacceptable drop out rates, and widespread failure to make Annual Yearly Progress in many APS schools.

A friend shares the following;
If the law doesn't support you, pound on the evidence.
If the evidence doesn't support you, pound on the law.
It neither the law nor the evidence support you, pound on the table.

Esquivel would do well to concentrate on the real problems in the APS, and forget about trying to take Glasrud down a peg or two; he is clearly out of his league.




photo Mark Bralley

New Mexico Attorney General Gary King,

in one of the greatest
understatements of all time,
said;

"We must keep moving forward
in the fight against corruption."

Yet, his own house is not in order.

I have filed a complaint with the NMAGO alleging that the leadership of the APS is breaking the law by using its own publicly funded private police force to investigate felony criminal misconduct involving APS senior administrators, link, and then withholding the evidence from the District Attorney still, even long after statutes of limitation have expired.

I think it is fair to say, I've gotten squat from his Office, by way of help in even exposing the truth about the scandal, much less holding APS Supt Winston Brooks and School Board President Marty Esquivel accountable for their parts in it.

The line between the truth you can and cannot get from his Office is not a clear line. It is not drawn at everything the law allows, and it is unenforceable.

If he is not telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about the public interests and about his public service (subject to due process and the law) and he cannot be held accountable for that failure, accountable under an impartial system over which he has no undue influence, and powerful enough to hold him accountable, even against his will,

he has a little moving forward to do, himself.

There is a fundamental ethic. It is truthtelling.

If you are not accountable to a system that requires truthtelling,
in contrast to the legal system which only prohibits telling lies,
you are not honestly accountable to any system of rules, at all.



photo Mark Bralley

What have they got to lose?

I am trying to get a few Senators and Representatives to step up and pick a fight over ending the culture of corruption.

So far, I have not heard from 41 Senators, and 69 Representatives.

Senator Rod Adair has stepped up; he is willing to sign his name on the call for an Extraordinary Session of the Legislature, whose sole call is to do whatever can be done to make it impossibly difficult for politicians and public servants to escape accountability for their corruption and incompetence.

I am engaged in an off the record discussion with one Representative. He is concerned about;

• the likelihood that enough legislators will actually step up, and sign the petition for a call, and
• the likelihood that the mission will be subverted by those who will take advantage of the "open-endedness" of an Extraordinary Session,by flooding it with legislation, resolutions, and memorials that are not germane to ending public corruption and incompetence, and that
• any attempt to pick this fight, if unsuccessful, will be used against those who pick it, in their next election, and finally,
  
• the argument that is as old as it is specious, "you can't legislate ethics in people."

On the last point I agree, but then that is not the intention of legislation creating ethical standards and enforcing them, any more than the point of legislation creating legal standards and then enforcing them, has the intent of making people law abiding (in their hearts).

Whether a person is law abiding or not, whether they are ethics abiding or not, is an entirely separate issue from whether or not we can create meaningful standards of conduct and competence, and then hold them accountable when they are not.

The Representative also expressed the belief that the corruption and incompetence can be ended by working within the process. I reminded him that working within the process did not prevent the culture of corruption from emerging, has not prevented it from being brought to an art form, and it has done precious little to mitigate it, much less end it.

Until a way can be found to end a culture of corruption without individually exposing the corrupt, (wo/men of great privilege and power) it will not end. They will never act to expose their own corruption and incompetence. They will never hold themselves honestly accountable for their own conduct and competence. It would utterly defy everything we know to be true about human nature, in particular, about human weakness.

It is this, that Socrates was writing about when he first penned; "absolute power, corrupts absolutely."

If we work "within the system", any corruption ending legislation, if among its effect would be the individual exposure of the corrupt and the incompetent, will die in Senator Linda Lopez' Senate Rules Committee, like every one before.

It borders upon delusional, to suppose that it will be different in the next session. The system cannot be repaired from within. It was Albert Einstein who pointed out

"The significant problems we have cannot be solved
at the same level of thinking with which we created them."

The next level above "the system" is the people.

The people have the ability to end the culture of corruption,
politicians and public servants do not.

If this falls through, and Adair is the only one who steps up,
what price will he pay for having been so bold?
Will his opponent in the next election, point to this commitment and somehow use it against him?

How? Does his opponent really say, vote for me, not for him, because he once signed a call to create an Extraordinary Session , the sole purpose of which was to end the Rot in the Roundhouse?

Or will he shunned by those legislators who would rather continue their culture of power and privilege in government, a culture that enables all of the corruption and incompetence to prevail?

The real question is;

could legislators move us from national laughing stock, to shining example of transparently accountable government, even if they wanted to?

If they can't, if they haven't the character or the competence,
then we need a whole new bunch of legislators who can.

If you concede that the answer is yes, they can end it
if they want to, the next question begged is;

why won't they?

What have they got to lose?

Janice Arnold-Jones dominates Quay County straw poll.

Quay County delegates to the Republican Party Primary Convention, sought direction from those attending their monthly meeting of the Quay County Republican Party.

The straw poll they conducted,
gave Rep Janice Arnold-Jones
a resounding win;
more than 70% of ballots cast.








The sole objection to her candidacy has always been, she is "unknown".

Yet it appears that among those who get know her, she is a favorite, and a worthy contender.

It becomes then, just a matter of getting the word out.




photo Mark Bralley

Rod Adair is the first to respond;

every one else will be among the last.

I issued a personal challenge every single state legislator
(subject to the limitations of the legislative website, link)
to call themselves into an extraordinary session
for the purpose of ending public corruption and incompetence.

Senator Rod Adair
is the first
to pick up the gauntlet.

Mr. MacQuigg:

The idea of an extraordinary session has already been tried—just at the end of the regular session on February 18.

It actually requires 26 senators’ signatures, which was not a problem—there were probably more than 30 of us who signed the petition. The problem was in the House of Representatives, which needed 42 signatures. They could not get more than 25.

The same situation exists today: the Senate could probably easily meet the requirements of an extraordinary session, but the House will not come close to doing so.

I hope this helps.

Rod Adair
State Senator
R-Roswell
Chaves & Lincoln Counties

I hope there's still a copy of the petition lying around somewhere.

I would like to know which of them had the character and the courage to sign their name, and which did not.

Every single Representative is up for election in 8 months.

This is an election issue.

I say, if their name isn't on the petition,
we should vote them out of office.

The petition could play as soon as the Primary Conventions this weekend.

Several Candidates are sitting legislators and whether their names are on this petition or not, counts.

Their character counts; their courage counts, and
their competence counts.




photo Mark Bralley

What of the 25 and the 42?

It will take 26 Senators and 43 Representatives to call an Extraordinary Session to end the cultures of corruption and incompetence in State Government.

It would be a shame if we could only find 25 Senators and 43 Representatives with character and courage enough to show up to the rumble, link.

Which begs a question;

How many of them have the character and the courage to sign up anyway, link, as a matter of principle, knowing they will probably lose?

Lets rummmbbbblllllle! !! !!!

Let's point to the time, the day, and the place, where we will
fight the final battle to end the Rot in the Roundhouse.

Let's call out those who oppose;

• meaningful and unequivocal standards of conduct and competence for politicians and public servants, within their public service. And,
• swift and inescapable accountability to those standards. And,
• transparency in government limited only by; due process and the law.

If there is a fight, they will lose;
they are defending an indefensible position.

They will try to avoid the fight.

We must carry it to them.

Email your legislator, link
Email them all.

Tell them you want an Extraordinary Session, the purpose of which is to end the cultures of corruption and incompetence in public service, at once, and for all.

Tell them you want one now, before they run for election,
so that you really can through the bums out,
according to who showed up for the rumble.

Let's rumble!

Denish; all talk, no walk

Lt Governor Diane Denish would like voters to believe that she is all for open government; state contracts on line, the Sunshine Portal, and all that. She hardly misses a beat.

But if you ask her to comply with the Inspection of Public Records Act by surrendering public records that might prove personally embarrassing and difficult to explain, well, apparently she's as willing to stonewall public records requests as the rest of those in the Roundhouse who feel their power and privilege excepts them from accountability to the law, link.

Denish, Richardson faking it, suggests Monahan

Joe Monahan, link, became the second blogger, link, as far as I know, and the first of the heavy hitter in the blogosphere to suppose that the fight between Lt Gov Diane Denish and Governor Bill Richardson might have more to do with helping Denish win in November than with she having picked a real fight over anything.

Denish has a PR problem called "Big Bill". She is going to have to come up with something more than a few staged fights with him to be shed of their inextricably linked legacies.





Photographs of Denish and Richardson together are rare.

Rarer still are photographs of the envelope actually being passed and, the hand shaken.

These, with Denish close by, were taken by Mark Bralley who wrote the accompanying piece, link.

Imagine the consequences

Suppose there were nailed on a wall somewhere, a choice.

Suppose you could require every politician and public servant,
or would be politician or public servant, to make that choice.

Let's make a choice, shall we end the culture of corruption state government, at once, and for all?

or;

should we not?

My premise; there is character and competence enough
in the Roundhouse, that they could write and pass legislation
that would effectively end the cultures of corruption and incompetence.

There is character and courage enough in the Roundhouse,
to make government as transparently accountable as it can be; state of the art.

If three of five legislators, link, chose to do so, they can bring about an Extraordinary Session of the Legislature. During which, nothing is germane that does not effect the end of the cultures of corruption and incompetence.

Can it be done? is there the competence?, is there the courage?

Can these folks write unequivocal standards of conduct and competence for politicians and public servants within their public service?

Can they provide inescapable accountability to those standards?

Can they make government as transparent as the law will allow?

Can they prove to us that they will tell us the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth except according to due process?

The matter is not one of can it be done,
it is a matter of will it be done.

It is a matter of character and of courage.

Will it be done?

That would depend on the number of State Representatives and State Senators who are willing to put their names on a call for a call.

Some one of them is going to be the first to pick a side in this battle between good and evil.

Every other one of them will be among the last.

Some one's name will be the last on the list, forever.

There will not be a list of the names opposing transparently accountable government, for reasons which are self evident. (OK, there will be a list, I promise, but their names will not be on it because they put them there)

They will instead, attempt to hide their indefensible position by pretending that the choice has not been presented to them, or they will abuse their usurped power and privilege by refusing to acknowledge the question.

If this choice is forced upon them before the next elections,
voters for once, really will have the opportunity to vote the bums out.

Hear ye! Hear Ye! Hear Ye!

Do you support or, do you oppose;

convening an Extraordinary Session of the Legislature, at the earliest opportunity, robustly webcast, and with the understanding that there will be no decision on the public interests without public participation.

Support

1. _____________________________

2. _____________________________

3. _____________________________

Oppose

1. _____________________________

2. _____________________________

3. _____________________________

An email and a link to this post were sent to every member of the House and Senate at 8:20 am, Tuesday, 3/9/10.

City taxpayers on the hook for $11M plus, lawyers get $3M plus.

In 1995, the City Council bowed to pressure from local businesses and neighborhoods and rezoned a property to their advantage. They didn't follow state law in doing so.

And now, millions of tax dollars have been paid to lawyers on both sides, and taxpayers will be coughing up an $8.3M settlement, plus all the lawyers fees, plus interest, link.

City Attorney Bob White said, "It's been expensive".

Gee, ya think?

White claims,

"the protracted litigation has not been a waste".
The decisions in the case "will help guide land use
decisions in the state for years to come."

It is difficult for me to believe that, that guidance could not have been purchased somewhere else for a whole lot less than millions of tax dollars.

White added, "I think this case has brought some clarity that wasn't there before."

Let's hope so, we really can't afford many more lessons at this rate.

School board well functioning, says Esquivel.

APS' School Board just had its annual election of officers.
The faces will remain the same.

School Board President
Marty Esquivel said, "the
decision was an indication of
a well-functioning board" link.

If the name of the game is
covering up an ethics and
accountability scandal in
the leadership of the APS,
the board is functioning well.

They and the Journal are, in fact, doing a great job.

They are doing a great job of covering up;

• keeping a Superintendent, rounded loathed by his subordinates, in office by offering him extended contracts and a half million dollar golden parachute, link, or,
• evading an independent audit of executive and administrative standards and accountability, or
• keeping role modeling off the agenda for more than a year in the Policy Committee, or
• denying due process to hundreds of whistle blower complaints in the Audit Committee, or
• Avoiding any audit that individually identifies corrupt or incompetent administrators, , or
• hiding an open and honest accounting of spending at 6400 Uptown Blvd, or
• obstructing justice by suppressing evidence of felony criminal misconduct involving APS senior administrators until well after statutes of limitation have expired, link, or
• ...
  

Yeah, they're doing a bang up job, a bang up job of failing almost half the students in the district, while at the same time, covering the ass of every administrator and board member who has a hand in the failure.




photo Mark Bralley

Sunshine Portal Transparency Act has a grandfather clause.

Anyone who is in the middle of state contract with terms that won't stand sunshine, can breathe a sigh of relief. The effective date is July, 1, 2011, the end of the 2011 fiscal year. Contracts from this year won't have any sun shine on them through the portal.

At best, they will appear in the feckless government data base, link.

It is interesting that no ethical reform ever takes place, "at the earliest opportunity". The rats are always given an opportunity to scurry for cover.

Apparently, it is a "professional courtesy" extended by legislators to each other and to their cronies.

APS' leadership's new accountability

The leadership of the APS continues its downward spiral in actual, honest accountability to meaningful standards of conduct and competence, link.

There was time when APS' s website offered stakeholders the opportunity to expose criminal misconduct, and even ethical misconduct, by means of a process that guaranteed anonymity to complainants, link .

The anonymity is important. A recent audit of the APS reported a "culture" in the APS, of fear of retribution and retaliation.

In 2008, the leadership of the APS promised accountability to "ethical" standards of conduct.

That accountability was important as it was validation of the leadership's sincerity as role models.

Students in the APS are expected to hold themselves honestly accountable to ethical standards of conduct, link.

The leadership of the APS used to be accountable as role models; their code of conduct read;

in no case shall the standards of conduct for adults
be lower than the standard of conduct for students."

The Board voted unanimously to strike those words from their own code of conduct. At that moment, they abdicated as role models, they excepted themselves from actual accountability as role models of the student standards of conduct;

even during the few hours a day that they hold students accountable for their character and conduct.

They did that upon the advice of their lawyers, and
upon their personal lack of character and moral courage.

Ask the senior-most
administrative role model,
APS Supt Winston Brooks,
if he is honestly accountable as
a role model, he won't answer.

He won't even look you in the eye.





Ask the senior-most executive
role model, School Board
President Marty Esquivel,
if he is actually and honestly
accountable as a role model
of APS Student Standards
of conduct; he'll at least
look you in the eye.

But he won't answer.



When the question is; will you step up as a role model?
any answer except yes, means no.

Stonewalling, means no.




photo Mark Bralley

The new Weh

I was listening to Allen Weh's latest radio spot.

You could easily imagine him sitting a chair in his study with soft music playing in the background.

Apparently his handlers
have convinced him that
"baseball bat wielding psycho"
isn't playing well.

It might work well at war,
but not so well in negotiating
with Democrats in Santa Fe.




Can they sell the notion that a tiger can change its stripes?
Can an old zebra learn a new trick?
Can an old man change his basic personality and instincts
based on some new found insight?

Will voters buy it?

I certainly hope not.




photo Mark Bralley

Denish and Richardson sparring over NMPED failure.

NM's application for federal funding grants for education has been rejected.

It is time to shoot the wounded, and blame the innocent.

At the heart of the dispute; NM's losing bid for more than a hundred million dollars in federal funding for education.

The person most responsible for
the failure is a Richardson
appointee; NM Secretary of
Public Education Veronica Garcia.

She headed the grant writing effort,
and the application was rejected.







Lt Governor Diane Denish says it because Garcia's group wrote an inexcusably lackluster proposal.

"It is unacceptable that New Mexico's children will not enjoy the benefits of Race to the Top funding because the grant writing team was not able to put together an application outlining a real, meaningful plan for education reform," Denish said, link.

Richardson stepped up to defend his appointee, arguing;

"The Lt. Governor's comments are inappropriate, misinformed and unproductive."

Denish's criticism;

"This type of lackluster performance is inexcusable, and I challenge Dr. Garcia and her team of educators and business leaders to develop a strong and competitive application for New Mexico."

"They were clearly looking for ideas that were innovative."

"Education Governor" Bill Richardson's people were quick to point out that Denish's only real involvement in the effort, was to write a letter of support for the grant application, in which she called NM's application; "innovative".

Richardson's office also pointed out that Denish had a chance to "roll up her sleeves" and work on the application herself, but chose not to. They say she enjoyed "many invitations" to participate personally.

Denish, through her spokesman, James Hallinan, link, denies being invited at all.

Clearly, someone is lying.

Denish needs a fight with Richardson , to erase an indelible image;



This though,was not the right fight to pick,
because her own conduct and competence,
as manifest in the grant application process,
were not above reproach.

And while they're busy blaming each other,
to give her political cover in November,
public schools are out a hundred million dollars.




photos Mark Bralley
NEA photo from the NEA

Herrera will surrender the letter, but not before making herself look even worse.

Secretary of State Mary Herrera wants to bury the letter of resignation that included a host of allegations of ethical misconduct in her Office.

Attorney General Gary King says it's a public record, link.

But, according to good ol' boy logic, "any day you don't lose, you win", so Herrera will hold out until she has no choice. Perhaps, before the letter is torn from her hands, some other member of the Richardson administration will step in a deeper pile of crap, and the attention will be drawn away from her, so she can pursue her refusal to surrender the records in court, a process that she could drag on forever.

The part of the logic she missed, was the part where you have to keep what you are doing hidden while you wait for the news cycle to subside. She was not able, and will not be able, to keep the story under wraps.

In fact, the story has now morphed into a story about how she is playing games with public records law, and she is doing it in plain sight.

Terrell found the money quote for us, it comes from Deputy Secretary of State Francisco Trujillo who said,

"... it wasn't only Salazar whom he was trying to protect by not releasing the letter but other employees mentioned in the letter."

Wow, on a couple of issues;

• does anyone really believe Trujillo when he says he is trying to protect Salazar, the guy who just outed his boss? And
• those "other employees" he is trying to "protect", does the Deputy Secretary of State know so little about public records law that he really believes he can redact an entire document and not just the names of those his is trying to protect?

The more they talk, the worse they look.

Keep talking guys.

Heinrich's argument specious.

Normally, if you are a politician, and one of your contributors starts to stink, you donate the money to your favorite charity, and all is forgiven.

Like when Lt Governor Diane Denish gave back the money from the Housing Authority swindlers, after they were indicted.

All was forgiven.

But not Congressman Martin Heinrich, he's going to keep his.

He's says OK because, he already spent it.

The argument is specious.

Someone else first argued;

"No debt is too old for an honest man to pay."

Congressman Martin Heinrich took some money from Congressman Rangel, and Rangel stinks.

So does Heinrich's reason for
not paying contrition like
everybody else does.




photo Mark Bralley

Hererra, closing the barn door after the horses have gone.

Secretary of State Mary Herrera's incompetence and corruption were the subject of a letter of resignation recently submitted by one of her subordinates. The employee, in his resignation, wrote that her administration was the most "crooked organization" he has ever worked in.



Understandably, she doesn't want us to see the letter.

But, the letter is already out. The Journal has a copy.

If it is already out, it is only a matter of time until it will be in the hands of everyone that wants a copy. Never the less, she is fighting to keep in under wraps, going so far as to claim exception under the New Mexico Inspection of Public Records Act, in response to a request filed by blogger Heath Haussamen, link.

When we have the letter in one hand, and the NMIPRA in the other, we can compare them and determine for ourselves whether the law has been deliberately misread in order to provide herself cover.

She has turned a one day news cycle into one which will last for as long as she continues to try to hide the letter from public knowledge.

That in itself, speaks to her competence.




photo Mark Bralley

APS' cell phone policy survey

The leadership of the APS wants to write a policy that restricts cell phone use. They are making a mountain out of a molehill. The are simply manifesting their frustration over their lack of control over the situation, and think they can regain control by writing another rule.

The problem is that they really don't expect students to follow the rules; so writing yet another rule is no guarantee of compliance, only a source of frustration for the relatively few teachers who will try to enforce the rule because it is the rule; despite the lack of support they will get from site administrators. They will fight a kid over his phone, turn it over to the principal, who will be the good guy by giving the phone back to the kid (with an admonishment that if they get caught again, there will be "consequences"), and the teacher will be the bad guy. It is their car that will get keyed, it will be their coffee that get spit into, it will be their desk drawer that gets crapped in.

Fundamental to any policy is enforcement. Winston Brooks has saddled teachers with a Discipline rubric that lists "disobeying authority" as among the most minor of infractions a student can commit.

He wants teachers to enforce yet another "stupid" rule, and yet is willing to do nothing to students who will disobey that rule, no matter how many times they disobey it.

For example, one of the reasons they cite as a problem that will be addressed by a ban is, cyber-bullying by means of cell phones.

I would suppose, there aren't that many students using cell phones for cyber-bullying, so they're writing a policy that effects 90,000 students, a 7000 teachers, to address the misconduct of a relative handful of kids.

It is cyber-bullying that should be against the rules, not "using a cell phone" to do it.

There is no indication that the administration will own the enforcement of the new rule; teachers will be expected to bear the burden. Note that no effort has been made to solicit their opinion individually; the term "staff" includes a lot of people who will not be expected to fight with some kid over his phone. In truth, the term "teacher" includes a lot of people who will not fight with kids over phones.

Before they create another rule for teachers to enforce, they need to ask teachers if they actually will. Otherwise, were going to end up writing another rule that kids will ignore, and in the end, we will have only reinforced the notion that rules are made to be broken.

The survey included the following;

1*. parent, student, staff, other

1. Should APS have a Cell Phone Use Policy? Yes No

2. Is it reasonable for schools to expect students to keep cell phones and other personal electronics powered off, silenced and concealed from view during the school day? Yes No

3. Do you think high school students should be allowed to use their cell phones and other personal electronic devices like iPods during lunch? Yes No

4. Do you think high school students should be allowed to use cell phones and other personal electronic devices like iPods during passing periods? Yes No

5. Is it reasonable for schools to expect students to keep cell phones and other personal electronic devices powered off, silenced and concealed from view on school buses? Yes No

6. Do you think it is reasonable to restrict students from using cell phones and personal electronic devices on school property or at school-sponsored activities to access and/or view internet websites that are otherwise blocked at school, including Facebook, MySpace and YouTube? Yes No

7. Do you think school personnel including teachers should be allowed to confiscate cell phones and other personal electronic devices if students violate the rules outlined in the district’s cell phone policy? Yes No

8. Comments or concerns:

Finally, a Senate Memorial I can get behind!

Senate President Pro-tem Tim Jennings found the time to write Senate Memorial 2 recommending Governor Bill Richardson for the movie mogul slot.

Blogger Terrel shared it with us, link.

A call for an Extraordinary Session of the Legislature

Suppose someone put the subject on the table; an Extraordinary Session of the Legislature for a sole purpose,
legislating the end to waste and corruption in state government.

Write the law that ends the culture of corruption, at once, and for all.

No memorials, no secret meetings, no nonsense.

Cameras on, archives ready.

If the subject were on the table, there would be an opportunity
for legislators pick a side in the battle against bad government.

The paperwork that generates the Extraordinary Session, will be co-signed by every single legislator who really wants to end the corruption.

Everybody else, is against.

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

If we could do this before the next election,
we could actually throw the bums out,
because we would know exactly who they are;
the ones to when asked if they wanted the corruption and
the incompetence to finally end,

said, no.

Denish's suggestion box; how's it working out for us?

Lt Governor Diane Denish's plan to end the culture of corruption was hang up a suggestion box of sorts. She called it an Efficiency Hot Line, link.


I am assuming that if it created even one efficiency, we would have heard about it.




In contrast, Rep Janice Arnold-Jones wants to give state employees to the opportunity to testify before the legislature and, under its full protection and sway.








How long before we give up on the Denish approach, and try something a little more aggressive in fighting the battle against the culture of corruption, and incompetence, and complacency, and complicity, and compliance?




photos Mark Bralley

Rail Runner stays; at what cost? and, to whom?

The simple answer to the question, at what cost? is,
$50,000,000 a year.

That $50M has to come from somewhere;
your pocket or program cuts.

If it's coming out of your pocket, in the form of new taxes,
you should have had some say in that decision.

If it's coming out of program cuts, you should probably have
had some say in that as well.

The simple truth is that you have no idea how the Rail Runner is going to be subsidized.



There in lies the problem. The issue is not, how are we going to pay for the Rail Runner? but rather, why was that decision made in secret from stakeholders?

Why were we kept out of the process?

For the answer to that question, you will have to go to the Democrat leadership in both houses who see no problem with secret meetings and abundantly inadequate webcasting of even those few meetings that happen in public.

Enjoy the ride.




photo Mark Bralley

Serious allegations made against Secretary of State Herrera.

The Journal reports this morning, link, about allegations made against NM Secretary of State Mary Herrera.

An employee, a former assistant district attorney, within his letter of resignation from her office wrote that he "has never worked in such a crooked organization."

The complaint, of course, has now gone dark. The office of government charged with representing our interests in the process won't even admit that they have received a complaint. According to the Journal;

"A spokesman for the AG's office would neither confirm nor deny that the office is looking into the issues raised by Salazar."

The lack of transparent accountability will do nothing if not feed the supposition that something is going to be covered up.

That supposition would not be fed, if everyone concerned were telling as much truth as the law allows. Instead, they will tell only the truth that the law requires, if that.

And I suppose that someone, Herrera, is going to get away with murder.




photo Mark Bralley

No more 1% for public art.

There is a law in this state that requires, under certain circumstances, 1% of the money appropriated for a capital project be spent on "public art".

For example;
there is a highway interchange
going in next Speaker Lujan's
place, link.

I have no idea
how much it will cost us.
Let's say $100M to keep the math easy.

That would mean a million dollars will be spent on public art, my guess would be, around his interchange; perhaps a Lujan Museum of Arty Stuff.

In which case, we'll have to ponying up a few million more dollars, I guess.

How about taking the 1% for public art and replacing it with 1% for the State Auditor's Office, to pay for a forensic audit of the entire arrangement, beginning with,

why is a highway interchange being built next to
Lujan's place, in the first place?

photo Mark Bralley

The march of the lemon.

It would appear that our illustrious governor
may have stumbled upon a better job, link.



Don't let the door
hit you on the way out, link,
Governor.




photo Mark Bralley

Update; we're stuck with him;
he doesn't want the job, link.

... shucky darn!

Corrupt government does not flow from incorruptible government

If it were possible to "elect" people who could actually end the culture of corruption in government, there would not now be,
a culture of corruption in government.

Those people would have been elected in the very first election.

Cultures of corruption in government end in revolutions.

Torches and pitchforks. They are the only tools that can pry the corrupt and the incompetent from the power they have usurped.

They always have been, they are, and they always will be,
the only tools with which, tyrants can be deposed.

I yield to the crooked sum bitch from Bernalillio County

Legislators treat each other with a great deal of respect.
On the floor, they don't use each others names.
Instead they refer to each other as "the honorable" and
the "gentleman" or "gentlelady" from such and such county.

Which means on any given day, the most honorable and ethical
legislator in the Roundhouse, willing be standing there
shaking hands with the most corrupt and dishonorable sum bitch
in the whole place, and they'll be congratulating each other
on their "honorable" service to the people.

There is on the one hand, corruption.
There is on the other hand, guilty knowledge of corruption.

And in positions of public trust, not a wit of difference between them.

What bullshit.

St Pete the Younger, has not earned it.

Aside from all of his qualifications, expertise, and experience,
Pete Domenici Jr has not earned the right to sit in the seat.

Candidates for election are required to get petition signatures in order to run.

It is demanded as proof of their earnestness and commitment.


Candidates for the top seat, must offer some evidence of earnestness and commitment enough to do that job in particular.

Sacrifice is the currency of commitment.

Where did he fight for us; where is his blood on the ground?

Domenici may have a political machine powerful enough
to keep the power in the family, but he doesn't have the creds.

He hasn't paid his dues.




photo Mark Bralley

Shake up at Jimmy Carter Middle School

The facts, as per usual, are hard to find. APS has gotten quite expert at hiding the truth from stakeholders. Never the less, it appears;

The police officer stationed at Jimmy Carter Middle School by the Albuquerque Police Department has been pulled from the assignment. He was replaced by an officer from the Albuquerque Public Schools Police Department.

The difference; the one was accountable to the community, the other answers to the leadership of the APS. The one, "wouldn't keep secrets" about the criminal and near criminal activity at the school. The latter, will.

Problem solving in the leadership of the APS, begins with hiding any inconvenient truths from stakeholders. More important than addressing any one of the host of problems at JCMS, is making sure that no administrator is held personally accountable for the part they play in the problem. It is all about covering asses.

A recent Climate Survey conducted at JCMS revealed substantial problems at the school. The results were then effectively hidden from stakeholders; administrators were protected from the consequences of incompetence and/or corruption.

How exactly, does one solve a problem while at the same time denying that the problem exists? Solving problems, under those circumstances, becomes exponentially more difficult.

APS' Police Department is not accredited, certified, or certificated, by anyone. It is a publicly funded private police force that reports directly to, and only to, the leadership of the APS. A primary function of a private police force, a Praetorian Guard, is to keep evidence of criminal activity involving APS administrators, in house.

When it was revealed that APS senior administrators were involved in felony criminal misconduct, link, the matter should have been investigated by outside law enforcement; it was not. The APS Police Department was called in to investigate (itself), and more than three years later, long after statutes of limitation on felony criminal misconduct have expired, they are still "investigating", and the facts are still secret from the public.

Then Supt Beth Everitt promised that results of the various investigations would be turned over to law enforcement for criminal prosecution. That promise has not been kept.

Three years later, evidence of felony criminal misconduct involving senior APS administrators, still has not been surrendered to the District Attorney for prosecution.

The Journal, which broke the story three years ago, steadfastly refuses to report upon the fact that nothing ever happened, no heads ever rolled.

Though the Journal "promised" to tell its readers the truth about what is going on in their public schools, that promise has not been kept either, even through election cycles that saw board members re-elected and hundreds of millions of tax dollars entrusted to people who are hiding the truth about felony criminal misconduct involving their own.

There is a need for an independent investigation at Jimmy Carter Middle School.

If you ask Supt Winston Brooks why that investigation is not underway, he will give you the same answer he gives to any question about administrative standards and accountability in the APS; he will stonewall.

He will look the other way
and pretend he has not heard the question.




photo Mark Bralley

Richardson "screwed" again by Larry Barker

The last time KRQE Investigative Reporter Larry Barker exposed Governor Bill Richardson's near criminal abuse of his prerogative to create plum state government jobs as political favors, Richardson said he wasn't going to comment on the allegations because Barker was going to "screw" him on the story.

Well, Barker is back, exposing even more indefensible hires at outrageous salaries. One lady, whose parents gave $86K to Richardson's various political campaigns, was given a job as a clerk, for 60,000 tax dollars a year.

Richardson, according to Barker's latest report, link, declined to explain, defend, deny, or even acknowledge Barker's allegations, though he was given ample opportunity.

Because after all, he is being "screwed" yet again.

While various lawmakers, when interviewed, expressed all manner of upset over the facts, apparently that will be the only thing they do about the real screwing that is going on here, the screwing of those who placed their trust and treasure in the hands of Bill Richardson.




photo Mark Bralley

Backroom dealing, right under our noses.

The law was pretty clear; the meeting during which differing bills from the Senate and House would be reconciled, would be conducted in full view of stakeholders. It was touted as a major step forward in open government.

Rather than have that open and honest meeting,
the leadership of the Senate and House decided to hold the meeting in secret anyway; exclude the opposition and call it a "caucus" instead of a "conference committee". Then they held the meeting in our (Round)house. They didn't even have the decency to hide.

We said, we want to watch the deal making.

They said, up yours.

They told us they were going to have the secret meetings whether the law prohibited them or not, link, and no one took them at their word.

Education cuts coming

They haven't decided how much exactly. Probably somewhere around 1 or 2 percent.

Please note, I wrote; "they" haven't decided as opposed to,
"we the people" haven't decided. They will let us know what they came up with.

In order to keep administrators from feeling the pain,
lawmakers approved legislation which allows
more students to be put into classrooms and
more students to be put into teachers' student loads.

Pupil teacher ratios are going up.

I haven't read the bill, but I'm pretty sure,
there is no language in it requiring administrators to handle
larger loads of administration with fewer administrators.

Seems a little unfair, and imprudent, and maybe
not the best thing in the world for kids or teachers,
or the future of the state.

Taxation according to Langland

William Langland's theory;

it is OK for a government to take money from
one of its citizens and give it to another of its citizens
even without the permission of the first.

dates to mid 1630s. link.

There is disagreement over the premise.

There is heated disagreement over how much
the government can take from one of its citizens,
to give to another.

The question of who gets to make the decision has not been fully decided.

Some would ignore the admonishment;

the beginning of the end of democracy
is when people discover that
they can vote themselves money,

and allow the poor to take as much as they want.

Some would allow the rich to decide, how much it is
they want to give.

Historically, the decision has run the gamut from the rich
keeping it all, to the poor, taking it all away from the rich
and then sharing it "fairly".

The lesson we learned was;
when you take everything from the rich and give fair shares
to the poordistribute it fairly
among the poor, it is not long before the quick and powerful
reclaim a more "natural" share.

Strong lions have a better day in general, than weak ones.

It is the way of nature; it is immutable.

The "let's take from the rich and give to the poor" argument needs a little fleshing out before we just start doing it willynilly, and according to the whim of a bunch of people who won't let us watch them doing it.

I propose a survey of state employees,

including, especially including; those who work in education.

The survey be conducted by an independent third party.

The ethically redacted results of the survey will be surrendered to the public record at the earliest opportunity.

The survey questions will determined by stakeholders.

The goal; every state employee be given an opportunity to respond candidly, forthrightly, and honestly to legitimate questions about their public service and about the public interests, without fear of retribution or retaliation.

I propose that we begin the process immediately.

For our part, we will follow and support,
only those candidates who carry that flag.

fyi; Rep Janice Arnold-Jones stood on the steps of the Roundhouse, before the last legislative session began, and pointed to the need for legislators to hear about waste and corruption from state employees themselves.

Heck, she was willing to subpoena them if she had to.

By way of disclosure, I will be doing everything that I can to help her get elected. If you think that includes deliberately misleading you on anything, I would invite you to read elsewhere.

That said,

This is the face of leadership;
proven competence,
proven character,
proven courage and,
abundant grace.

She wants to use the expertise and experience of state employees, to end the culture of corruption and incompetence in state government.

What other candidate will carry that flag?
So far, not one.




photo Mark Bralley

Truth in webcasting

If they will not tell you the truth, about what it is that they won't tell you the truth about, why do you still think they're telling you the truth at all?

Who decides what they can and cannot do, out of our sight?
Are the terms of public in-servitude the prerogative of the public, or of the public servants? Is it their call or, is it our call?


In truth, the question is moot, but only because
they have already answered it.

They said,
it is theirs.

And all the sheep went; baa aa... , baa aa..., baa aa ....,



photo Mark Bralley

Brooks gives non-college bound students short shrift, and that's OK

Everyone knows there are students who cannot, will not, and should not go to college. There are students who are trades bound for a number of good and completely defensible reasons. They will become the carpenters, the plumbers, the diesel mechanics, and the laser technicians we need. They will make good livings and will live happily ever after.

But they will not be getting any help from their APS schools. The programs are expensive and APS has "better" things to do with the money.

According to APS Superintendent Winston Brooks, college bound students are a higher priority.

In the Journal this morning, link, we read;

"APS Superintendent Winston Brooks said he sees a need to offer classes for kids who are not college-bound.

Unfortunately, the focus and money right now must go (instead) toward beefing up the high school curriculum, he said.
"It's our responsibility (that) they're college-ready," Brooks said. "... It's our job to prepare them (for college, not for a trade)."

And what about the "dumb asses" who aren't going to college?
Why don't we just let them "drop out" and free up the money
for the kids who really deserve it?

This is outrageous!

I cannot immediately cite empirical data, but I would suppose from my experience that this prejudice affects minority students disproportionately. It is institutional prejudice against minority students, it is institutional racism, it is institutional classism!

And if every single person who has expressed concern over achievement gaps and minority students does not now step up and express their outrage over this blatant discrimination against minority students, I would invite them to shut their hypocritical mouths forever!

Five of the seven APS School Board Members are Hispanic; Delores Griego, Lorenzo Garcia, Marty Esquivel, Paula Maes, and Robert Lucero. Where is their outrage?

Where is Moises Venegas' outrage?

Where is Dicky Gallegos' outrage?

Where is Eddie Soto's outrage?

Where is NM Public Education Department Secretary Veronica Garcia's outrage?

Where is the outrage of every legislator who voted in favor of the Hispanic Education Act?

As far as I can tell, there is only one reason to not give this guy the boot right now, and that is that the APS School Board has provided him with a half million dollar golden parachute, link, if we do. It's good to see that the Board has its funding priorities straight.



photo Mark Bralley

Robust webcasting sorely missed in the Roundhouse

If you make the trip to the Roundhouse and watch the process first hand, you will come away disappointed and disillusioned. There is a reason these people don't want an incontrovertible record of the process available to the public.

Apparently, even the pitiful accommodations that have been made; audio only, and cameras too few and too distant to be meaningful, are not being done well; listeners complain of incomprehensible and inaudible audio streams.

No one in Santa Fe is willing to defend the secrecy with anything but the most superficial and often nonsensical arguments.

Representative Ben Rodefer started a thread on Democracy for New Mexico arguing in favor of a caucus of Senate and House Democrats. I asked him in that thread, to justify the need for conducting that meeting in secret from stakeholders. I asked his supporters to justify the need for secrecy.

None will respond to the question with a compelling argument.

There may be justifiable needs for secrecy.

But unless they are overriding justifications, they don't trump the people's right to know how their power and their resources are being spent.

This session should have been robustly webcast,
just like the last should have been,
just like the next should be.

The last was not, this is not, and the next will not, for no reason other than the lack of courage and character necessary to hold themselves honestly accountable to the people for their conduct and competence as politicians and public servants.

Democrats pay little attention to their "leader".

Lt Governor Diane Denish recently wrote; "Before anyone starts debating tax increases, legislators must do everything possible to make sure government is leaner and more efficient."

Well, government is neither leaner, nor more efficient; we still have way too many exempts; the exempts that have been "cut", in reality, have instead been moved into classified positions where they will be even harder to remove.

There is not one fewer double dipper. The Rail Runner is still chugging along, draining $50M a year from the state budget. The "pork" is still being mightily protected.

All the while, Denish's "followers" are debating one tax increase after another.

Either she's not leading, or they're not following.




photo Mark Bralley

Allen Weh's two tool, tool chest; a baseball bat and a veto pen.

Gubernatorial candidate Allen Weh assures voters that he needs only two tools to deal with the entrenched politicians and public servants in Santa Fe; a baseball bat and a veto pen.

He is wrong.

Take for example; Pit Rules, link. Pit Rules apply to environmental aspects of drilling for oil and gas. The rules, written to protect the environment, may be over protective and unproductive. There are those who believe that the Pit Rules stifle exploration and development and contribute to dwindling tax revenue to the state.

When asked about that specifically, at the Tea Party Forum, candidate Rep Janice Arnold-Jones said she plans to call a moratorium on enforcing the rules, and then review the situation to come up with a solution that protects the environment without over-biting the hand that feeds state coffers.

Weh, countered by saying, while his opponent, Arnold-Jones, would "study" the problem, he would end it with a stroke of his Governor's pen; baseball bat at the ready should anyone object.

The simple fact is that the Governor simply does not have the authority, under the State Constitution, to strike down regulations at will; Weh's plan is a non-starter; it will never leave the gate.

Voters must decide, whose plan is more workable? Can knowledge, experience, and the ability to negotiate effectively fix the problem, or do we need somebody swinging a baseball bat and a veto pen to beat the opposition into submission?

It's a no brainer, if you ask me.




photos Mark Bralley

Ed Adams will keep unearned pay

The lawyers have decided that the cost of fighting the sweet pay deal that the Chavez administration gave to Ed Adams might well exceed the 27K unearned dollars he will keep every year until tax payers are finally rid of him, link.

Nowhere in the discussion, is there mention of his real worth to taxpayers; apparently not much. As the Director of the Department of Municipal Development, he failed to prevent the taxpayer ripoff by the Mayor's crony's nephew's landscaping company, link.

A bigger problem than sweet pay deals out of the Mayor's Office, is the fact that the good ol' boys who work in city hall are not honestly accountable for their conduct and competence as public servants. The losses far exceed the tens of thousands of dollars in unearned salaries; easily reaching into the millions.




photo Mark Bralley