Torrance County whistleblower taking heat

Torrance County Commissioner Vanessa Chavez-Gutierrez is a whistleblower. She wrote a letter to the state auditor asking for an investigation into apparent corruption in the letting of county contracts.

KOB reports that the contractor in question is harassing the Commissioners family, link.

There are really only two mechanisms for exposing governmental corruption in New Mexico; whistleblowers and investigative reporters. Except for them, taxpayers appear to be at the mercy of corrupt and incompetent politicians and public servants.

It begs a question about where the responsibility lies for oversight. Is it reasonable to expect the powerless to hold the powerful accountable?

God bless folks like Vanessa Chavez-Gutierrez who have the courage to blow the whistle on corruption, but if governmental oversight is left up to a handful of whistleblowers and investigative reporters, there will always be corruption and incompetence.

The first legitimate use of power is to ensure that the power cannot be abused. It is up to government to provide oversight over its spending of our power and resources.

It is up to us to insist that the oversight functions of government, the state auditor and attorney general, have the staff and resources they need to make it impossibly difficult to steal from taxpayers without getting caught.




photo Mark Bralley

Are teachers really the problem?

More than a third of a century ago, I began teaching. At the time, there was a great deal of concern about evaluating teachers; who would do it, how would they do it, and what criteria would they use?

Like most aspects of education, little has changed in the intervening three decades. We're still focused on teachers as the problem and teacher evaluation as the solution.

For awhile back then, the fad was to call teachers facilitators.
It made a great deal of sense, the work of learning has to be done by the student, the teachers function was to help them learn.

The focus on fixing education by improving teaching, assuming "teaching" can be substantially improved, is addressing the smallest aspect of the problem. The biggest part of the problem is students who don't want to learn, and even the best teachers cannot make students want to do anything.

Public education includes teaching and learning. Learning is an individual activity. For the same reasons you can lead a horse to water but can't make it drink; you can't make students learn. The best teacher in the world cannot teach a student who does not want to learn. There is no such thing as a disengaged learner; they have to be there, present and engaged for learning to take place.

The reason kids don't want to learn has a great deal to do with the obsolete model for public education they must endure; 30 kids sitting in five rows of six desks, working out of the same book, on the same page, at the same speed for twelve grueling years.

What are we training them for? When again in their lives will they be compelled to join a group of thirty strangers and form a thought choir in order to accomplish some goal? Even if we could take groups of 30 kids with nothing in common but the year of their birth, and form them into thought choirs, why would we want to?

Lots of things can be mass produced quite economically and effectively; well educated human beings are not among them.

The teacher centered model of education supports an arguement the better teachers means better results. The simple truth is the difference between an average and above average teacher is not that great, and even if it were, it wouldn't make much difference in the overall results because teachers aren't the weakest link in the chain, students are.

In the Journal this morning, link, an extensive article on the "benefits" of National Board Certifications for teachers. The underlying supposition, the exercise makes them better teachers. If you're beating a dead horse to begin with, is a more qualified jockey really your best investment?

Clearly the efforts board-certified teachers put into getting their certification makes them better teachers; but how much better? Deep in the Journal report, the caveat;

Research on National Boards is still inconclusive, but several studies have shown that students taught by National Board-certified teachers show more academic growth than peers taught by non-board certified teachers — although other studies have shown no significant difference. It is unclear whether the process makes teachers better, or whether better teachers choose to go through it. However, there is some evidence teachers improve their classroom practices as a result of the experience. (emphasis added)

Yet here we go, plunging headlong into a very expensive endeavor ignoring the lack of a foundation based on empirical data.

If there really are super teachers, teachers that stand head and shoulders above good average teachers, where are they, and why is their skill set so impossible to quantify?

APS' four new goals

Assuming the Journal has it right, link, the leadership of the APS has agreed upon four goals to last them until their next goal setting exercise;

1. improving academic achievement,
2. maintaining sound financial stewardship,
3. improving community engagement and
4. maintaining a safe school environment

Improve academic achievement - seems reasonable under the circumstances.

Maintain sound financial stewardship - implies sound financial stewardship exists. What definition of "sound financial stewardship" does not include candor, forthrightness and honesty in the accounting of the spending of public resources? Until they produce a candid, forthright and honest accounting of their spending at 6400 Uptown Blvd, the goal should read; improving sound financial stewardship.

Maintain a safe school environment - again, implies that schools are safe now. Until they produce empirical evidence to substantiate their claim, the goal should read; creating a safe school environment.

The recent audit finding; there is a "culture of fear of retribution and retaliation" in the administration of the APS, points to a lack of safe environment for adults. There is no reason to expect students to feel any safer at school than their teachers do.

Improve community engagement
If there is a pinnacle of "community engagement" it is two-way communication between the leadership of the APS and the community members they serve.

But School Board member Kathy Korte has a different idea; she is pretty clear about what she means by community engagement; folks will get background checks and then go volunteer in classrooms.

She has a right to her preference.

She has no right to impose her preference upon people she supposedly serves. It is not her prerogative to define community engagement, it is the prerogative of the community.

The Citizens Advisory Council on Communications is ready, willing and able to help create a model for two-way communication between interest holders in the APS.

Korte has done everything she can to thwart the CACoC effort. Her utterly indefensible justification for denying petitioners due process, appears to be their association with me.

They, of course, have a Constitutionally protected human right to associate with whomever they please, and without becoming targets of a school board member's vendetta.

Korte is more comfortable attacking the messenger than responding to the message, because her position on the message is indefensible. She has no good and ethical argument against creating a venue for two-way communication between the leadership of the APS and the community. If she had a defensible position, she wouldn't need to bring me in to the discussion at all.

Korte is not alone.

There is a reason, at the beginning of every public forum, Korte tells citizens they are not allowed to ask her or anyone else, any questions.

There is a reason they oppose the creation of a meeting venue where questions can be asked and candid, forthright and honest responses are expected.

Despite their stated goal; improve community engagement;
there really isn't one of them who will stand on the record in
support of the creation of a forum where open and honest
two-way communications can actually take place.




photo Mark Bralley

APS District Goals, where are they; what are they?

If you make your way to APS' award winning website, and search for "District Goals", link, you will no mention of new goals. As far as anyone who depends on the website for current information knows, they still have the same 8 goals.

Yet, the Journal reports, link, that APS has new goals;

The district settled on four main goals, down from the previous eight, after extensive public comment about what direction it should take and what issues are most important. The goals are improving academic achievement, maintaining sound financial stewardship, improving community engagement and maintaining a safe school environment.

Why haven't APS Executive Director of Communications, Crisis Manager and Calendar girl Monica Armenta, and their million dollar a year effort to "communicate", been able to communicate that the goals have changed?

A question is begged; how can the new goals be reached, if no one knows what they are?

The last time they wrote new goals, they celebrated them, literally, link.

Do they have new goals or not? When do they plan to let us know what they are?

Shouldn't they at least tell the folks who are supposed to do the work that will enable them to meet their goals?




photo Mark Bralley

Attempted cover up, covered up

KRQE continues to investigate, link, the allegation that an APS senior administrator, Rep Sheryl Williams-Stapleton, took advantage of taxpayers. According to their report, they have uncovered evidence that suggests Williams-Stapleton attempted to cover up the fact that she had not completed the appropriate paperwork for the political leave she took.

Of interest to taxpayers; the ball upon which we must keep our eyes; the administrative handling of allegations of administrative corruption or incompetence.

Brooks knew about the attempt to falsify records.

KRQE reports;

APS Superintendent Winston Brooks said he did not take
kindly to Stapleton’s attempt to backdate leave documents...

"I don’t think anything ought to be backdated. I think it’s unethical.”

Brooks is apparently unaware,
the falsification of public records
is a fourth-degree felony.

Yet, how could he not know,
except willful ignorance?

If the allegations of criminal
misconduct are investigated,
who will do the investigation?

Brooks would like to have his own publicly funded, private police force, the APS police, do the investigating; a police force that is certificated by no one, certified by no one, and accountable to no one except Winston Brooks and the leadership of the APS. And, most importantly, which has demonstrated a willingness to hold and hide evidence.

Unfortunately for Brooks, APS signed an MOU with Bernalillo County Sheriff Dan Houston, requiring them to surrender evidence of felony criminal misconduct by APS administrators, to either the Sheriff's Office or the Albuquerque Police Department.

After botching their previous self-investigation of their own public corruption and incompetence, and then suppressing evidence until statutes of limitation expired on felony criminal misconduct by APS senior administrators, link, the APS police force is no longer allowed to self-investigate felony criminal misconduct involving APS senior administrators.

The understanding reads in significant part;

Any report of a crime which may be determined to be a felony offense, excluding property crimes, shall be promptly reported to and investigated by BCSD or APD.

Not much wiggle room there.

It would be interesting to know, if any evidence of Williams-Stapleton's efforts to backdate records, has been forwarded to the Albuquerque Police Department or Sheriff's Office as required by the MOU.

In support of conjecture that no evidence has been forwarded; Brooks' unwillingness to respond candidly, forthrightly and honestly to legitimate questions about his handling of allegations of her misconduct.

Asked if he disciplined Stapleton over the leave situation,
Brooks said, "Yes. The answer to that is yes."

Asked, what was that discipline? Brooks hid the truth behind
"personnel rules".

A letter of reprimand, if she got even that, is a public record.

APS cannot write "personnel rules" that except them from the
requirements of the Inspection of Public Records Act.

Except that they can (obviously), but only because they have an unlimited budget for litigation and legal weaselry, even against the public interests.

Why would Brooks need to hide the letter, or records of any other consequences he provided, even in violation of the law, except that they point to a lack of accountability in the leadership of the APS?




photos Mark Bralley

KOB shines light on Torrance County Commission

KOB TV sent a news team over to Torrance County yesterday,
to cover the shenanigans at Torrance County Commission meeting.

"On your side" reporter Chris Ramirez reported on two issues;
efforts to limit citizens and media rights to record County Commission meetings, link, and a move to unseat the Commission Chair, Vanessa Chavez-Gutierrez, link.

The villain in both pieces is Commissioner Lonnie Freyburger. It was his idea to offer up a resolution that would prohibit recording devices of any kind to be used during Commission meetings.

And it was he who wondered aloud if the position of Chair could be "re-voted" in order to unseat Chavez-Gutierrez in retaliation for creating "negative publicity". She had written a letter to State Auditor Hector Balderas, asking his office to investigate credible allegations and evidence of corruption in the letting of county contracts.

The contrast between Freyburger and Chavez-Gutierrez could not be more dramatic; he proceeding from the premise that both civil rights and the truth are his to dispense as he sees fit, and she, every bit the opposite.

Chavez-Gutierrez had every right,
some might argue responsibility,
to write her letter to Balderas.

Freyburger may not like that
he wasn't in the loop, but that's his
problem; a personal problem that
he needs to deal with internally;
not by unseating Chavez-Gutierrez.

She needed neither his permission nor his approval to write the letter.

Chavez-Gutierrez said she will think about Freyburger's request that she step down, and then respond.

After the meeting adjourned, several citizens approached Chavez-Gutierrez, encouraging her to remain as Commission Chair. As I have written before, she is doing an extraordinary job chairing commission meetings, and it would be a huge loss to lose her services in that capacity. Especially if she were to be replaced in that position, by Freyburger himself.

Chavez-Gutierrez intends to leave the County Commission and run for a vacant legislative seat. Her manifest quiet courage and character will be a refreshing change in the Roundhouse.




photos Mark Bralley

APS Stadium, how much will it really cost?

In November of last year, I asked APS Chief Operating Officer Brad Winter for a candid, forthright and honest accounting of the money they spent on their new boardroom at 6400 Uptown Blvd.

We're still waiting.

Even after a public records request and a complaint filed with APS whistle blower program, he is yet to provide that candid, forthright and honest accounting.

According to internal documents, when Winter was asked about the failure to produce the records, he replied;

I am not responsible for public records requests.

The truth, I suspect, is that he has no idea how much money they spent.

I believe there aren't records at all. Either that, or the records point to incompetence and corruption. Why else will they not produce them?

There was an audit done of the APS Finance Division at the time they were spending more than five and half million dollars renovating a building that they had assured taxpayers, would pay for itself.

The auditors found a profound lack of standards, accountability, and record keeping.

One might hope that in the intervening years, their standards and accountability and record keeping have improved.

One might hope.

Dashing that hope, the facts;

• they still haven't produced a candid, forthright and honest accounting of spending at 6400 Uptown Blvd,
• they still oppose any independent audit of their administrative standards of conduct and competence,
• the abject lack of due process for complaints filed against administrators.

Laurence Sterne observed;

“Trust that man in nothing
who has not a conscience in everything.”

If Winter won't tell us the truth about spending at 6400 Uptown Blvd, what makes anyone think he will tell the truth about spending on the new stadium?




photo Mark Bralley

Policy Committee agenda violates Open Meetings Act

If you take a look at the agenda, link, for the Policy Committee meeting tonight, you will find the following;

Future Topics: Various topics will be presented as time allows.(Discussion/Action)

It is illegal to "discuss" an item that is not on an agenda, much less take "action" on it. The Open Meetings Act reads;

Meeting notices shall include an agenda containing
a list of specific items of business to be discussed or
transacted at the meeting. (emphasis added)

Where except in the minds of the leadership of the APS and their lawyers, does "various topics" meet the specificity required by the law, and by their obligations to interest holders?

School Board bullies bullying protestors

According to the Journal, link, "... several dozen protestors gathered outside Albuquerque Public Schools district offices on Wednesday, saying the district is not doing enough to prevent bullying.

Apparently, they went inside and spoke at the public forum at the School Board meeting. One it is reported, ran afoul of the board's rules of decorum; including (time) limits on free speech.

The board routinely bullies community members during public forums.

The bullying runs the gamut from imposing completely arbitrary limits on the free speech of citizens who stand up at their forum, to using a private police force to enforce the more arbitrary and indefensible rules of decorum; rules that prohibit asking questions about the public interests and their public service.

John Kennedy wrote;

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible,
make violent revolution inevitable.

School boards who make two-way communication with stakeholders impossible, make the civil disobedience of their rules inevitable.

You can hardly blame people who take affront at limits being placed on their right to peacefully assemble and petition their government, face to face.

The board wants to engage with community by "listening" to them for two minutes every two weeks. They steadfastly refuse to provide a venue where they will respond to questions about the public interests and about their public service. They spend a million dollars a year on a carefully crafted public relations campaign in order hide scandals like the corruption in the APS police force; an effort that could not survive the first open public discussion of important issues.

There is no good and ethical reason to oppose a venue where parents who are concerned about bullying can carry on a conversation about the district's efforts to mitigate it. There is only one reason to oppose a public discussion with the leadership of the APS on the subject of the administrative handling of bullies and other chronically disruptive students; to hide the truth.

Board Member Kathy Korte's has only one reason to obstruct the success of the Citizen's Advisory Council on Communication, a group whose goal is to create venues for community members and the leadership of the APS, to engage in two way communication about important issues; like bullying,

... to hide the truth.




photo Mark Bralley

APS Deputy Chief misled investigator

Pursuant to a public records request, APS has produced a statement made to APS' Ethical Advocate investigator, by APS Deputy Chief Steve Gallegos. The statement was made in response to my complaint against him, link.

My version of the incident read;

I went to APS Administrative Offices in order to conduct personal business in the Employee Benefits Department.

After initially being denied the opportunity to do my business, I was finally "escorted" to Employee Benefits. No one else to my knowledge, is harassed by having an escort attached for no reason.

While I was conducting my business, APS Deputy Police Chief Steve charged into the benefits office, announced that he had to leave a "crisis" to attend to me, and begin harassing me. He asked me several times if I had finished my business and I told him, clearly, "no". I had not.

Never the less he arrested me and demanded that I leave the building.

I had done nothing untoward; the arrest and ejection were totally unjustified.

This is the second time Gallegos has been involved in an unlawful arrest and ejection; he helped throw me out of the EHS Gubernatorial debate, again without justification and upon Winston Brooks’ unlawful orders.

I asked the investigator to gather;

All public records; belt recordings, security videos, emails, texts, phone calls, etc related to the incident.

Gallegos has a different story.

On the afternoon of February 28, 2012 Mr. MacQuigg came to City Centre and told [name redacted] that he had business in Benefits. [name redacted] came to APSPD Dispatch where I was extremely busy dealing with three lockdowns at three separate schools. This concerned subjects with a gun and knife on the campuses. I told [name redacted] that I would meet with Mr. MacQuigg as soon as I could manage to break away for a moment. Within three to four minutes [name redacted] returned to dispatch and told me that Mr. MacQuigg was very loud, argumentative and demanded to know why he could not have free access to benefits.

I told [name redacted] to escort Mr. McQuigg (sic) to Benefits and I would meet them there shortly. Within five minutes I met them in Benefits where Mr. McQuigg (sic) held a receipt in his hand. I asked him if he finished his business and he immediately began to ask questions not related to his business. I again asked him if he was able to complete his business and he said yes. I told him that we had several lockdowns in progress and he said “then go.” Mr. Mcquigg (sic) again began to ask questions and I said I had to leave. He asked if he could finish his questions and I said no because I was very busy. I turned and began to walk back to dispatch and Mr. MacQuigg walked behind me and out of the building. No further conversation took place between me and Mr. MacQuigg.

At no time was Mr. MacQuigg arrested or ejected from the building. It appeared to me that Mr. MacQuigg wanted to question me and argue rather than conduct his business. I would not engage him in this manner.

Steve Gallegos

I have redacted the name of the CSA who Gallegos said reported my "very loud and argumentative" demeanor. This because I have no idea whether she said anything like that and APS did not produce any record that she had. If I was indeed "very loud and argumentative", a record of that behavior was made by security cameras. APS surrendered no camera record.

As to what Gallegos was doing and how busy he was; it's all a smoke screen. Gallegos had no good and ethical reason to intervene at all. I should not have been stopped at all. No one else, on their way to Employee Benefits has to wait for a personal escort from the Chief of their private police force.

The questions I asked him were legitimate; why was he there harassing me? I did suggest that if he was busy, he should, by all means, go. When it became apparent that he was not going to leave; that he was going to stay there and harass me, I did resume my questioning of his harassment.

He asked me if I had finished my business, I told him no. If, as he maintains, I answered "yes", then it would have been recorded and witnessed. Again, APS produced no records of such.

Gallegos writes;

I turned and began to walk back to dispatch and Mr. MacQuigg walked behind me and out of the building.

Despite the fact that my business was not finished, and despite the fact that I clearly did not want to leave, Gallegos would have you believe, I simply wandered after him, he having given no indication that I had to leave.

I was arrested when I was deprived of my liberty. I was ejected from the building when he insisted that I leave.

APS will not produce the public records I requested, because those records would prove Gallegos is a liar.

Gallegos isn't the only liar. When the EA investigator asked Chief of APS Police Force, Steve Tellez,

"... do we have a legal restraining order again (sic) Mr. MacQuigg barring him from the building?

Tellez responded with a lie;

No, all we have is a letter from the Board banning him from CC. (emphasis added)

True there is no legal restraining order. What there is, is an unlawful restraining order; a "letter" banning me from participating in School Board Meetings; it does not ban me from CC (City Center).

The point of this exercise was not to hold APS Deputy Chief Steve Gallegos accountable for harassing me and denying me the free exercise of my Constitutionally protected human rights. I knew that would never happen.

I filed the complaint to prove there is no due process in APS whistle blower hotline, for complaints filed against senior administrators or board members.

And, I believe I have.




photo ched macquigg

Brooks admits; institutional racism "certainly probably" a problem in the APS

The exact words reported in the Journal this morning, link.

Brooks emphasized that as a large organization, APS likely has problems with discrimination.

“I acknowledge there’s institutionalized racism,” Brooks said. “I acknowledge that discrimination is an issue in all large institutions, and it certainly probably is in ours.”

Probably? Does he really not know if there is institutional discrimination in his organization?

Maybe he should take a bus tour, link, around his own administration.

Frankly, I am aghast that he admits the existence of the problem at all. It is his desk where the buck stops, wikilink, on "institutional" anything.

He owns the problem. If there is institutional racism, it is because Brooks didn't make it clear to his subordinates,
there will be no institutional racism.

As to what might motivate Brooks to admit to a "shared" problem, and purely speculating: I think Brooks is willing to admit to sharing a problem with everybody else, in order not to have to talk about student discipline in the APS, link.

A recent audit found the leadership of the APS routinely falsified crime statistics to make schools look good, link.

There is a reason APS doesn't gather data on student discipline.

Does anyone really supposed that student discipline, the ineffectual administrative handling of chronically disruptive students, and the effects therefrom, have no effect on teaching and learning in classrooms?


I think Kent Walz and the Journal would rather chastise Brooks for a "shared" problem, than investigate and report upon student discipline in the APS.


There's a reason you haven't read about it in the Journal.




photo Mark Bralley

Korte's vendetta denies petitioners First Amendment rights

The First Amendment, quoted here in significant part, reads;

Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech ... or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

In effect it reads;

School Board member Kathy Korte, in
her capacity as a school board member,
cannot legally discriminate against, or
retaliate against, CACoC petitioners
who have peacefully assembled, albeit
with me, by denying them due process
for their petition.

Petitioners are being denied due process as the direct result of Korte's vendetta and her want to "get even" with me,

even it if means abusing the power and resources that have been entrusted to her.




photo Mark Bralley

Korte in violation of School Board Code of Ethics

I received an email from someone who attended the District and Community Relations Committee meeting where the Citizens Advisory Council on Communication petition received its first hearing and denial.

During that meeting, School Board Member Kathy Korte spent way too much time dissing me and instead of giving unbiased consideration of a legitimate effort to establish meaningful communications between the district and the community.

He wrote;

Korte really dislikes you and will not knowingly support anything that you are associated with.

I believe him. Korte would vote against the public interests in a heart beat, if in doing so, she can strike a blow, however puny and pathetic, against me.

She does so in blatant violation of the School Board's own Code of Ethics, link, which reads in significant part;

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

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

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

In basing her decision to oppose the recognition of the
Citizens Advisory Council on Communication, based on my membership in it, she violates their code.

In her obstruction of the Council, she is stifling the opportunity for real two-way communication with the community.

In using her position on the board to retaliate against a petition I signed, Korte is using her position for personal gain.

The School Board Code of Ethics, by their own free admission, is completely unenforceable.

Her malfeasance is also a violation of state law and the Governmental Conduct Act, equally unenforceable if one has enough unscrupulous lawyers and an unlimited budget for litigation against the public interests.



photo Mark Bralley

APS gets a "Sunny" award.

APS' award winning website just got another award, link.

It has been given a "Sunny" by the Sunshine Review, link.

I point this out because if you go to their website looking for the amount of money they spent on their boardroom, for example, you won't find it.

If you go looking for the results of standards and accountability audits, ones that identify administrative corruption and incompetence, you will find none posted.

You will find nothing posted on their website that doesn't help their public perception; the purpose of the website is to create a positive image, not to be transparent.

Yet here they are, receiving an award for transparency; go figure.

The room, belongs to the people.

The Torrance County Commission meets in a room that belongs to the people. Not in some esoteric sense, but in the most fundamental sense; they built it, they maintain it, and they make the rules about how the people will behave in it. They are called laws.

There are laws against disrupting public meetings. Not only did the people write the laws, they gave politicians and public servants the authority to enforce them, including police.

When a complaint is filed under the law, the respondent has due process to defend his interests and innocence. When "rules of decorum" are violated, the targets have no due process, especially against their own police.

Politicians and public servants do not have the authority to write their own rules, rules of decorum, about how the people will behave in their room. They have not been given authority to enforce their own rules.

In particular, they have no right to establish and enforce rules applying mostly to people whose outward appearance shows only an interest in gathering information and in holding politicians and public servants accountable in their public service.

Korte proves my point

When the petitioners for the Citizens Advisory Council on Communication came to APS School Board Member Kathy Korte for due process for their petition, they were given instead her lengthy diatribe on what an awful person I am.

It should not go unnoticed that she was able to do that without any opportunity for me to defend myself, because she is able to hide behind APS' publicly funded private police force and their unlawful enforcement of an unlawful restraining order.

The unlawful restraining order, he calls it a "banning letter", "revoking my privilege to attend school board meetings" was written by School Board enforcer Marty Esquivel.

If Esquivel and his thugs weren't keeping me out of meetings, I might have responded to Korte's criticism of me by reminding her; its about the message, not about the messenger.

I regard as vindication, attacks on me that come instead of the answering of questions.

Actually, I am not the only one who isn't allowed to ask board members questions.

They don't allow anyone to.

It was apparently only moments after Korte finished attacking me, when she told petitioners that APS answers every question they are asked.

How can she say questions are answered, when questions aren't even allowed?

There are questions I have asked, over and over and over.
So many times in fact, that they banned me from asking them ever again.

The questions are legitimate. I have done less wrong by asking them over and over, than they have done in refusing to answering them, over and over again.

1. Why will they not produce the ethically redacted public records of investigations of corruption in the APS Police force? (Not "how" the law allows them to hide the record, by why do they need to?)
   


2. Why are they denying due process to hundreds of whistle blower complaints? Why did they make a solemn commitment to address the appearances of conflicts of interest and impropriety created by allowing the administration self adjudicate complaint against other (even super-ordinate) administrators, by providing individual executive review and approval of every single complaint, and then renege on the commitment without having reviewed or approved even one?


3. Why will the leadership of the APS produce a candid, forthright and honest accounting of spending at 6400 Uptown Blvd?
   


4. Why are students expected to model and promote the Pillars of Character Counts!; a nationally recognized, accepted and respected code of ethical conduct, specifically; hold themselves honestly accountable to higher standards of conduct than the law, and Lorte is not?
   
   Why, as one of the senior-most role models of the student standards of conduct, does she not have to show students what it looks like to hold oneself honestly accountable to higher standards of conduct than the law? (It seems reasonable to expect her to answer this question in words any student can understand.)

If Korte responds to this post, it won't be in a venue where she will stand for follow up questions.

Perhaps she will respond in the Journal. The Journal likes to give her space, space where exception cannot be taken with what she writes. Just like no one gets to take exception with Winston Brooks' monthly PR column.

The Journal is aware of

1. the cover up of the corruption in the APS Police force,
2. the denial of due process to whistleblowers and petitioners,
3. the cover up of overruns on the board room, and
4. the abdication of APS senior-most role models of APS student standards of conduct,

and steadfastly refuse to investigate and report upon credible allegations and evidence of an ethics and accountability scandal in the leadership of the APS.

The affiliate stations in School Board President Paula Maes' New Mexico Broadcasters, KRQE, KOAT, and KOB know as well. They refuse as well, to investigate and report upon credible allegations and evidence of an ethics and accountability scandal in the leadership of the APS.

When the question is;

Will you respond to legitimate questions about
the public interests and your public service?

any answer except yes means no.

Neither she, nor the board, nor the administration will sit down and answer questions whose answers are embarrassing, shaming, or expose criminal misconduct.

School Board President Paula Maes has never denied, defended, retracted, nor even acknowledged having said,

she would never agree to any audit that individually identifies corrupt or incompetent administrators.

Those are not her exact words; I will stand by my interpretation of her expressed intent. Her remark is in the public record.

She will deny having said it, or meaning it, but the simple truth is there has never been an independent audit or investigation since, witness the Caswell Report, whose results are not being hidden, and even in violation of the Inspection of Public Records Act.

I will meet Korte in any venue. She can surround herself with anyone she wants; board members, administrators, lawyers, I don't care.

I will promise to ask legitimate questions about the public interests and her public service, and she will promise to respond candidly, forthrightly and honestly, according the standards of conduct she and the board establish and enforce upon students.

Attacking the questioner is a desperation move by someone
defending an indefensible position. We will not talk about me
or my blog. We will not talk about the messenger instead of
talking about the message.

Questions stand on their own; it doesn't make any difference
who asks them, or why.

Mohandas Gandhi observed after his struggle in speaking truth
to power;

First they ignore you,
then they laugh at you,
then they fight you
then you win.

Korte would rather ignore me, or laugh at and revile me,
but she won't "fight" me; she won't point to a time, a day,
and a place where she will actually stand up an take questions.

She can diss me all she wants, she is proving my point.




photos Mark Bralley

Torrance County Commissioners just want "decorum"

The Torrance County Commission will take up Resolution 2012-07 tomorrow morning.

If passed, the Commissioners will have limited the free exercise of Constitutionally protected human rights within the room. They should have a very, very good reason. There is fact only one reason to limit the free exercise of an individual's rights, and that is to protect the rights of others in the room to freely exercise those same rights.

It is not their responsibility to create a room where one citizen cannot annoy another. It is a betrayal of public trust to create a room where a citizen cannot annoy a commissioner.

If commissioners are not comfortable with the annoyance that comes with politics and public service, they should not be in politics or public service. Nobody is forcing them to serve.

According to the resolution, commissioners feel a need to limit
the free exercise of citizens' rights,

"in order to maintain the proper decorum required for
conducting the business of the county."

There are laws that apply to people who actually interfere with county business. If people are really interfering with county business in commission meetings and breaking the law in so doing, commissioners have a responsibility to enforce the law.

Because they know they can't have someone arrested for videotaping them, they invent another set of rules; rules of "decorum".

Rules of decorum have nothing to do with conducting county business. They have to do with creating a room that suits the interests of the decorators; the county commissioners.

It isn't their room to decorate.

They have no business writing or enforcing decorum.
They have no authority to arrange the room according to their
personal needs. The room belongs to the people.
They come to the people's room to serve the people.

In the end, you really don't get the government you deserve

You get the government you're willing to defend.

Government of the people,
by the people,
and for the people.

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




photo Mark Bralley

Big week for open government

Two meetings are scheduled this week; one in APS, the other in Torrance County.

In both, citizens will push back on government; they want to see what's going on with the power and resources being spent on their behalf.

As important as these battles are, the establishment media is conspicuously absent. You're not going to see the heavy hitters reporting on either meeting. The duties and responsibilities of the fourth branch of government, wikilink, have been trumped by something else.

If asked, I would argue they have bowed to personal and political loyalties.

It is an interesting juxtaposition of small town and big city government. Both are trying to set limits on public access to their deliberations.

In the one, the Torrance County Commission is trying limits on a constituent's right to record their meetings with her own camera.

In the other, the APS School Board is trying to enforce their edict; people are not allowed to ask them questions in public meetings, about the public interests or about their public service.

Big city or small town, it is the same; pols and public servants usurping control over power and resources that are not their own, and then setting roadblocks for citizens trying to wrest it back.

The terms of public service are the prerogative of the people, and not of commissioners or board members. If the people want to record them, it is their prerogative. If the people want to ask questions, it is their prerogative.

The Citizens Advisory Council on Communication is prepared to design a model for positive two-way communication between the leadership of the APS and the community members they serve.

The board, to date and for more than half a year, has stood in the way. The agenda for their meeting tomorrow, does not include a vote. The role call vote petitioners sought, as due process for their petition, won't take place during the District and Community Relations Committee meeting.

The agenda provides an opportunity for committee members to as questions of petitioners, but includes no opportunity for petitioners to ask their questions of board members.

There will be no opportunity for positive two-way communication
about the effort to create positive two-way communication.

How ironic.

Media cover up or conspiracy nut?

Those who abide by scientific method, know that you can't prove an explanation of an event, by arguing there is no other explanation. At best, there is only no other explanation we are aware of.

I would like to be able to prove;

there is a conspiracy in the leaderships of the Albuquerque public schools and the local media, to cover up an ethics and accountability scandal in the leadership of the APS.

As a matter of science and law, I can't prove that APS' Executive
Director of Communications meets with Kent Walz and the other heavy hitters in the establishment news, to discuss what "bad" stories they will cover. And they decide its OK to report upon APS when they're crushing dump truck fulls of student desks and furniture, but not to report on criminal conspiracies in the highest levels of the leadership of the APS.

But, how else can you explain it?

How can you explain the fact that they have not investigated and reported upon credible allegations and evidence of an ethics and accountability scandal in the leadership of the APS?

If you follow this link, you will find Journal investigation and reporting upon public corruption in the leadership of the APS police force. According to the Journal, money was moved from evidence to petty cash in violation of the law; a felony. They reported that a federal criminal database was used to harass whistleblowers and to do a background check on a deputy superintendent's fiance; as many as six more felonies.

If you read every word of every Journal ever since, you will find no investigation and report on, what ever happened to the APS senior administrators who committed those felonies? You won't find a story that reveals that the only criminal investigation that was done, was done by the APS police force itself.

Or that the results of their investigation were never turned over to the DA for prosecution.

Or that APS is in violation of the Inspection of Public Records Act for hiding the results of investigations including the Caswell Report; an independent investigation that actually names the names of APS senior administrators who participated in felony criminal acts.

If you view every minute of every investigative report that has been done by KRQE, KOAT, or KOB TV, all affiliates of Paula Maes' New Mexico Broadcasters Association, you will find no investigation or report on an ongoing cover up of felony criminal misconduct, allowing statutes of limitation to expire on felony criminal misconduct by senior APS administrators.

There is a conspiracy and cover up, and no way to prove it
except to point to what they aren't reporting.

Like, not even in the lowest corner of the last page; a report
on a tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy nut whose allegations and
evidence turned out to be completely unsubstantiated.

APS Board to hear Citizens Advisory Council on Communication Petition

Almost eight months after having received their petition, the APS School Board has agreed to hear and discuss it in an open meeting.

It is on the agenda, link, of the District and Community Relations Committee meeting, chaired by Lorenzo Garcia. The meeting is next Tuesday and begins at 5 pm.

Garcia has a history of expressing respect for public input. His committee is the only one that regularly includes a public forum on the agenda.

I still believe he holds honor and duty in higher regard than most in the leadership of the APS.

There will be formidable, albeit clandestine resistance to recognizing the standing of the Citizens Advisory Council on Communication and their effort to establish two-way communication between the leadership of the APS and the community members they serve.

It will be an interesting meeting.

I am prevented from participating in that meeting by an unlawful restraining order written by school board enforcer Marty Esquivel, and enforced by a publicly funded, private police force; unaccredited, uncertified, and unaccountable to anyone except the leadership of the APS.




photo Mark Bralley

Will the FOG fall on the next Torrance County Commission meeting?

I honestly can't say whose fist pounds the table last in meetings where the FOG decides where they will and will not make their stands. I'm pretty sure its not the Executive Director's.

It is not up to Gwyneth Doland to decide.

Has the FOG taken a stand on the intention of the Torrance County Commission, to limit the free exercise of citizens rights to take notes in meetings by any means, including cameras?

What comes next; no pen and paper? Gotta sit in the back if your pencil is "too sharp"?

There are two perspectives on limited rights.

One begins with an individual's absolute liberty in the free exercise of human rights. It ends with limiting that free exercise only when necessary, and only with the authority of all the people.

The other begins with rights in the hands of the government and ends in its right to dispense them in what ever amount suits its interests (read; the interests of politicians and public servants whose face is the government).

The terms of public service are the prerogative of the people, not of pols and public servants. The exposure of Commissioners to camera lenses is the prerogative of the people, not of Commissioners.

There must be a difference of opinion in the FOG. One side is rubbing their hands in anticipation of suing the Commission after they make their mistake, the other wanting to saddle up and go fight back, before the Commissioners Gone Wild commit their outrage.

Torrance County Commissioner Lonnie Freyburger and the rest of the Commission, were backed off his plan to outlaw all cameras.

I am given to understand that they will next consider; limiting the right to use cell phone cameras, only to citizens who have bought and brought a tripod for their phone!

I'd like to see FOG step into the ring. Does the FOG really have no advice to offer to the commissioners, about their plan?

I'd like to see them send someone to fill in the Commissioners, on the moral, ethical and legal implications of any decision they might make, to screw with citizens who bring cameras to commission meetings.

I'd like to be able to stretch a pint of Häagen-Dazs into four equal servings.

If citizens with cameras get stuck in a corner, it will not be in the public interests, it will be in Commissioners' interests.

This seems like a pretty much up and down battle between good and evil; the kind that Edmund Burke was writing about when he wrote;

The only thing necessary for evil to prevail in the world,
is for good men to do nothing.

Any citizen who wants transparency limited only by the law,
rather than by the whim of petty tyrants, has a stake in this fight.

Freyburger et al. are going to try to stomp on the free exercise of rights by citizens with cameras. They are going to see if they can get away with it making harder for citizens to hold them honestly accountable for their conduct and competence within their public service.

They will get away with it if no one steps up to stop them.




photos Mark Bralley

Torrance County Commission Open Meetings - round three

It began with Torrance County Commissioner Lonnie Freyburger offering a resolution banning recording equipment in County Commission meetings.

Round two, the March 14th meeting, saw the motion tabled for re-examination.

Round three, next Wednesday.

I am told that the resolution will return with additional and different, but no less bizarre, restrictions; a 24 hour notification of the County Manager (of the intent to film?), restrictions on camera noise, light restrictions (?) and a requirement that all cameras must rest on tripods. Will the commission supply tripods to citizens who haven't yet bought a tripod for their flip phone?!

Citizens have a Constitutionally protected human right to petition their government in whatever manner they choose. Those rights are limited only by respect for the rights of other citizens to participate in meetings in the manner they choose.

Their lawyer's opinion, the more access given to the public the better, but it needs to be controlled so all members of the public have the opportunity to see the meeting, hear the meeting, and and not be disrupted, is sound but doesn't justify unnecessary restrictions. Just because someone says someone else with a camera is interfering with their right to participate in the meeting, does not establish the validity of their complaint.

Just because someone thinks a handheld camera disrupts commission meetings, does not establish that it does. Suggesting that a tripod in any aisle represents a safety issue, regardless of the remaining width of the aisle, does not establish the existence of any real safety issue.

Just because someone is in favor of restricting others' rights, doesn't justify the restriction. That one person claims "she can't do her job with cameras rolling", does not outweigh another person's right to record.

It is pretty clear that there is at least one commissioner wants to put an end to citizens making their own recordings of board meetings. Having been advised by their lawyer that they can't do that, now they're grasping at straws in an effort to make it more difficult.

The commission's fundamental position appears to be that the onus lies upon citizens establish their right to record meetings, as opposed to, the onus falling on the government to establish both their authority restrict citizen participation in government and the real need to restrict citizen participation in whatever manner they choose.

Round three should be interesting; the bell rings at 9 am, Wednesday next.




photo Mark Bralley

Beth Everitt gets a contract extension.

Former APS Supt Beth Everitt and current Supt Winston Brooks are in a horse race over who can get the bigger golden parachute; contracts extended further into the future.

Brooks and the APS School Board managed to extend his contract until 2015, even beyond the individual board member's own terms of office.








Everitt has managed to do the same, link.

It looks like we have two winners!




photos Mark Bralley

Ethical Advocate complaints "closed"

I filed two complaints; one against APS COO Brad Winter, and one against Acting Chief of Police Steve Gallegos.

I alleged that Winter was hiding the truth about spending at 6400 Uptown Blvd.

An unidentified APS administrator, subordinate to Winter and APS Supt Winston Brooks, has determined,

Based on the information you have received, these are the dollar amounts for the construction of the John Milne Boardroom: construction: $384,450.00; IT: $150,240.53; furnishings: $22,595.77. It appears that you have received the information that was requested. This complaint is now closed.

If I have added their numbers correctly, they admit to total spending of $557,286.30. The Journal reported at the time, cost overruns alone of nearly $500K, link.

Yet, "case closed".

I filed an Ethical Advocate complaint against acting APS Chief of Police Steve Gallegos over his harassment of me when I went to APS' Employe Benefits to conduct personal business.

Part of the Ethical Advocate process is a proposed resolution and comment. Mine were;

How do you think this situation should be resolved?

First, I insist a fact gathering of witness statements and any records related to the unlawful arrest and ejection; including but not limited to any standing orders, written or otherwise regarding APS police force interaction with me.

Upon a candid, forthright and honest description of the incident and cogent facts, a final resolution can be determined.

Do you have any additional comments?

The APS police force has been used for years to harass me in retaliation and retribution for my efforts to blow the whistle on corruption and incompetence in the leadership of the APS. The effort involves administration at the highest level.

I was informed that my unlawful arrest and ejection from the gubernatorial debate at Eldorado High School resulted from orders by Winston Brooks personally.

An unidentified APS administrator, subordinate to Winston Brooks, has determined;

According to the APS Police Chief, you were not arrested on 2-28-12. There are no reports of any arrest on this date. According to the Chief, you had stated that your business with the Benefits Dept. was completed. You were then escorted out of the building. The Chief was involved in an emergency situation, which was also being reported by the media, and could not spend a great deal of time away from his office. This complaint is now closed.

I am prepared to testify that he asked me if my business was done and that I answered "no". The record will show he arrested me and ejected me from the building without provocation of any kind.

Yet, "case closed".

The appearances of conflicts of interest and impropriety are supposed to be addressed by an executive review of the administrative self-adjudication of complaints. They are supposed to review and approve every single complaint.
They promised they would; school board policy promised "review and approval" of any (and all) whistleblower complaints.

They have yet to review even one.

They are denying due process to well over 300 whistleblower complaints in order to cover up an ethics and accountability scandal in the leadership of the APS.

Kent Walz and the Journal should be investigating and reporting upon credible allegations and evidence of public corruption and incompetence in the leadership of the APS; if only to report the allegations and evidence aren't credible.

They won't of course, it's not the way they roll.




photo Mark Bralley

Editors back Korte, don't need no stinkin' facilitators

The editors came out this morning, link, in support of APS School Board Secretary Kathy Korte and her "vigilance against bureaucratic waste".

She, and they, think it is a waste of money to hire facilitators to help citizens and administrators reach consensus on important issues.

Editors wrote, if citizens need help petitioning their government, they should get it on their own time and dime. And that, APS' job is educate students, not their parents.

This though, school board policy reads;

The Board of Education recognizes that constructive
study, discussion, and active participation by citizens
is necessary to promote the best program of education
in the community.

But only on their own time and their own dime?

A more fundamental waste is to create advisory committees in the first place, knowing they will become hopelessly mired in meetings that go nowhere because they can't stay on track, because they lack chairmanship with real meeting skills.

APS has for as long as I can remember, responded to stakeholder efforts to be included in the decision making process, by forming them into committees and councils with no attention given to helping them function effectively and efficiently. Just because a group of citizens are educated, experienced and energized, doesn't mean one of them has the skill set to keep a contentious meeting on the rails.

It is hard to imagine a more omnipresent cause of failed meetings than the absence of a chair who was a skilled and impartial facilitator.

The editors have struck a blow against meaningful community involvement in schools. It doesn't come as any surprise; these are the same people who don't see anything newsworthy in the school board denying due process to more than a hundred petitioners and their petition to enable open and honest discussion of important issues, between the leadership of the APS and the community members they serve.

Whose actions are more regretable?

a candidate who has voted against the death penalty, and is more than happy, eager even, to explain her position and defend her vote,

or,

a candidate manifestly and deliberately creating beliefs and impressions that are misleading?

The venerable Joe Monahan offered, link.

"But Arnold Jones is not popular with the conservative Republican base. Her refusal to endorse the death penalty is especially problematic with them and her reaching across the aisle to Dems in Santa Fe has also drawn critics from the conservative column."

Interesting that Monahan points to her strengths as weaknesses. Rep Janice Arnold-Jones can explain and defend her vote against the death penalty. The simple truth is, there is no candidate more willing to explain and defend their position than she.

Her demonstrated ability to work across the aisle, though not appealing to the Parties, appeals immensely to the people.

Because of the difficulty in a frontal attack on her record on the issues, a lot of money is going to be spent trying to create an impression that Rep Janice Arnold-Jones is soft on criminals. They will offer as proof; her vote against the death penalty, even though that was not basis of her vote.

What she opposes, as far as I have understood her, is the spending more than 20M tax dollars to do it.

Voters may not agree with Arnold-Jones that 20M dollars might be better spent helping children grow up not to be murderers, than on killing one. But the political discourse is not headed in that direction because open and honest public discussions are her home field.

Her opponents will avoid a head to head on the issues of efficacy, effectiveness, and economy of the death penalty by resorting to relentlessly pounding on the vote, without once pointing to a flaw in the logic that justified it.

Voters will witness their own deliberate deception and then
ignore it when they cast their votes. Monahan is right about
those who will yell about her death penalty vote while ignoring
her death penalty position.

Candidates who tolerate and enable deliberate deception are
deliberate deceivers.

Why would anyone vote for someone who is manifestly dishonest?

Just because they are Democrat or Republican?

If there is open and honest political discourse, voters will grow to understand that there are good and ethical reasons to oppose the death penalty.

Monahan is right as well, about the "conservative column" among Democrats who cannot grasp good and ethical reasons to "work across the aisle".

If there is open and honest discussion, voters will appreciate the ability to work across the aisle. While working across the aisle isn't the will of the Parties, it is in fact, the will of the people.

There are candidates who are popular with the Democratic and Republican Parties.

And there are candidates who are are and will be popular with Democrats and Republicans.

Rep Janice Arnold-Jones is one such.




photo Mark Bralley

APS board will vote to limit meeting notice

Once a year, the school board is required to consider and approve an open meetings resolution; their plan to meet the requirements of the NM Open Meetings Act in the following year.

The agenda, link, published late yesterday, the minimum notice required by the law, indicates tonight is the night.

The last time they considered the subject of agenda notice, I encouraged Board Member Kathy Korte to press for more notice; some agencies offer 48 hours notice, some 72, some publish their agendas "as built" giving interest holders as much notice as possible.

Korte claimed she had been told that state law prohibited the board from extending their notice from 24 hrs to anything longer, link.

She went ballistic on me, when I informed her that she had been bamboozled, likely by School Board enforcer and "open government expert" Marty Esquivel.

Their new resolution, link, indicates they will again offer only the minimum notice required by the law, rather that extending notice to enable more participation by interest holders.

photo Mark Bralley

New Mexico coming up in the world, APS not so much

I remember when New Mexico was the 49th most corrupt state in the union; now were up to 39th, link.

The NM FOG's new Executive Director Gwyneth Doland gives us the story behind the story, link.

So why is our government so corrupt?

Even though public corruption and incompetence are rife in state and local governments, clear down to school boards, there seems to be little we can do about it except wring our hands when more of it is exposed.

Most of the exposure and accountability comes from investigative reporters. It says something about governmental oversight, that it seems to uncover very little on its own.

The level of public corruption and incompetence, the width and depth of cultures of corruption correlate directly to at most two variables; standards, and accountability.

I say "at most" two, when it really is only the one; if the least powerful cannot hold the most powerful, honestly accountable to any particular standard, it really doesn't make one whit of difference if the standard was a "higher" standard or only the law.

It is impossibly difficult for a corrupt or incompetent politician or public servant to survive if there is a place file a complaint. If there is a place where a complaint can be filed, and where that complaint will see due process, there will be an end to public corruption and incompetence.

The folks that gave New Mexicans our D- measured a lot of variables. They really had to measure only one, and there are only two scores; A or F, success or failure.

Accountability to meaningful standards of conduct and competence is fatal to public corruption and incompetence. 100 % accountability is 100% fatal.

Accountability is easy to quantify; it would sound stupid for someone to say they are honestly accountable to some set of standards, but couldn't actually show it to you. That's why if you ask, they don't answer; they stonewall; the only defense of an indefensible position.



Either you see it or you don't. Either you see the place where a citizen can file a complaint against a superintendent or a school board member, and where that complain will see due process, and where the superintendent or school board member will be held honestly accountable by a system over which they have no undo influence, and powerful enough to hold them accountable, even against their will,

or you don't.




photo APS Supt Winston Brooks, school board enforcer Marty Esquivel, and board head honcha Paula Maes, Mark Bralley

Brooks is back, and back in the Journal

I read APS Supt Winston Brooks' monthly public relations piece in the Journal, link, looking for spin that might be need of un-spinning, and found this gem, he wrote;
"Who in their right mind could oppose holding ... superintendents accountable? I’m certainly not (opposed to holding superintendents accountable), and my record, both here and elsewhere, indicates that."

Actually, it does not.

And his record will grow even worse today. He won't be blowing about it in the Journal. It won't come up there at all.

Today is the last day, according to the rules we play by in the Ethical Advocate administrative accountability drill, for Brooks as Chief Administrative Officer, to respond to complaint that the APS Acting Chief of Police Steve Gallegos violated my civil rights when he kept me from completing personal business in the Employee Benefits Office. He is aware, or should be, of every Ethical Advocate filed against APS senior administrators, and he is aware of the ones filed against him personally.

Brooks is also aware of the Ethical Advocate complaint filed against APS COO Brad Winter, and that it is being denied due process by means of a timely resolution.

The complaint alleges APS COO Brad Winter is violating the law in his ongoing efforts to hide a candid, forthright and honest accounting of spending on the boardroom and accoutrements at 6400 Uptown Blvd.

I would argue that Brooks is aware, or should be aware of the effort to hide evidence of felony criminal misconduct in the leadership of the APS police force.

If Brooks does not oppose holding Superintendents accountable, then he should not oppose the expectation that Superintendents tell the truth; truthtelling being fundamental to accountability.

If he doesn't oppose telling the truth about spending at 6400 Uptown Blvd, the why won't he tell it? Why won't he tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the ethically redacted truth?

If Brooks does not oppose being held accountable for the hiding of the truth about felony criminal misconduct in the leadership of the APS and their publicly funded, private police force, why won't he produce an ethically redacted copy of the Caswell Report, and of all of the other public records of investigations of public corruption and incompetence in the leadership of the APS?

If Brooks doesn't oppose being held accountable for his abdication from his responsibilities as the senior-most role model of student standards of conduct, why won't he look students in the eye and explain to them, in words they can understand, why they are expected to model and promote ethical standards of conduct, the Pillars of Character Counts!, and he is not?

If Kent Walz and the Journal don't oppose doing a story about Brooks instead of by him,
why won't they investigate and report upon credible allegations and evidence of an ethics and accountability scandal in the leadership of the APS?




photo and Walz frame grab Mark Bralley

Janice Arnold-Jones to be taken seriously

Rep Janice Arnold-Jones won a resounding victory at the Republican Party Pre-primary Convention Saturday.

The victory puts her at the top of the ballot and in the public eye. The public will like what they see.

It has been a struggle for Arnold-Jones whose success pleases Republicans a whole lot more than it pleases the Republican Party. The "Party" has gone out of its way to make her political success impossible, link.

Why?

I would argue, it is as simple as Arnold-Jones willingness to put people above politics. She takes her orders from the people, not from the Party, that the Party doesn't like it.

A bright and intensely curious person and politician, Arnold-Jones is an authority on the issues and obstacles for government of, by and for the people. She is a proven hero of transparency, having brought webcasting into the NM Legislature against considerable and powerful opposition.

Proven competence, character, courage and grace, and now, the spotlight she deserves.