Webcast archiving - the will of the people

The Journal reports, link, that two attempts to provide archiving of webcasts of legislative meetings were amended or tabled to thwart the effort.

The quality of reasoning going into the refusal is frightening;

“I think if the executive wants to do it, lets let them (pay for it),” 
Rep. Dennis Roch, R-Logan.
"When I leave here, I don’t want to think about this place.”
Rep. Paul Bandy, R-Aztec.

The people support any opportunity to hold politicians and public servants accountable for their performance in legislative meetings.

Some of those politicians and public servants would rather not be held actually and honestly accountable for their public service.

Guess whose will prevailed.

Since when is the will of the people a "wish list" for legislators?

How hard will the Journal dig to find the truth?

I have been insisting for a while, that the Journal needs to begin an investigation and report upon an ethics, standards and accountability scandal in the leadership of the APS.

All they have to do is to expose the scandal, or lay the allegation to rest at once and for all is to;

• examine the standards and competence that apply to senior administrators and school board (members within their public service), and 
• examine the various venues in which and by which they can be held "accountable" to those standards;

1. are they swift?
2. are they certain?
3. are they free of undue influence?, and
4. are they powerful enough to hold the most powerful accountable even against their will?

All they have to do is ask the leadership of the APS to

• produce copies of any standards of conduct to which they claim accountability, and to 
• identify the venues where complaints can be filed over their failure to meet those standards.

All they have to is ask, read and report.  They don't even have to leave their desks.  At most, they should have to read a few dozen pages; and then of course, tell readers what they find.

Journal Editor Kent Walz

Are there high enough standards?
Is there accountability; are complaints
impartially adjudicated in a timely manner and without appearances of conflicts of interest and impropriety, and without fear of retaliation?  Is there due process?

Research, evaluate, tell the truth; candidly, forthrightly and honestly.

Come on  Walz, step up!
Inform the democracy.




photo Mark Bralley

Winter's blunder will cost more than $125K - lots more

If you read the backsides of the reports on Winston Brooks' suit in the Journal, KRQE, KOAT, and KOB, you will find a number of steaming comments.  The most of the commenters think Brooks is the heavy; that he is doing something wrong by enforcing the terms of the settlement agreement APS entered into with him.

The settlement agreement included a promise that APS (Interim Supt Brad Winter) would not defame Brooks or his wife.  And damned if it doesn't look like Winter went right ahead and did just that. 

If guilt and consequences could be assigned where they belong, the quarter of a million or so that this thing is finally going to cost, would come out of his pocket and not out of the operational fund; dollars that were destined for classrooms before they were squandered along with our trust.




photo Mark Bralley

APS School Board Committee name change

The APS School Board will meet in regular meeting tonight.  The agenda, link, includes;

V. Special Issues

A. Consideration for Approval of the Name Change for the District and Community Relations Committee to the District Equity and Engagement Committee (Discussion/Action)
Presenter: Joseph Escobedo, Chief Equity and Engagement Officer

Action Memo on District Relations Name Change 2-18-15.docx, link

The Action Memo reads;

Approval of Name Change for the District and Community Relations Committee to the District
Equity and Engagement Committee

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
In December 2014, Superintendent Brad Winter and the APS Board of Education supported a new Office of Equity and Engagement in the district. The change in name and focus of the committee will support the district’s focus on equity and true engagement of all stakeholders in the community. In addition, this committee will focus on issues that are inclusive of all equity issues and will still allow for community dialogue on important issues in the district and community at large.

So what does it all mean?

The board has a Code of Ethics, link.  The 4th reads;

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

It is fair to examine the new focus in the light of that ethic.
Is the new focus going to create open and honest two-way communication between the leadership of the APS and the communities and community members they serve?

The smart money is on no. Past and current practice would indicate that they have no intention to move one bit closer to open and honest two-communication with stake and interest holders.

They should have been considering for at least a month now, the idea of establishing permanent community members seats on the District and Community Relations (soon to be District Equity and Engagement) Committee.  Their lack of response means no.

Any answer except yes, even stonewalling and saying nothing at all, means no.

But they are happy to come up with some new descriptors for their communications effort in the hope stake and interest holders won't notice that nothing has really changed.

When the dust settles tonight, there will still be no place, no day, no time when the leadership of the APS will promise to sit and answer questions about the public interests and their public service,
candidly, forthrightly and honestly.

APD Police Chief Gordon Eden is a liar

In the Journal this morning, link, editors build a compelling case that APD Chief Gordon Eden cannot be trusted to tell the truth to the people he serves.  His unwillingness to be honest with stake and interest holders goes beyond the usual exploitation of the weaknesses in the NM OMA and IPRA.

They stopped short of calling him a liar outright.

Is there a difference between "telling a lie" and "not telling the truth"?  The Wikipedia has an excellent report on the many kinds of lies, link.  A complete understanding of all the different kinds of lies, leads to a working conclusion; "lying" has to with intent.  If the truth is told in a manner calculated to create a false impression, it is a lie.

It would appear the particular kind of lying Eden engaged in is called "economy with the truth".

"Economy with the truth is popularly used as a euphemism for deceit, whether by volunteering false information (i.e., lying) or by deliberately holding back relevant facts ..."

The editors conclude and wonder;

So, why did APD engage in this obfuscation...?
How could there really have been the possibility of video being retrieved when all along they knew there could be no video because the camera wasn’t plugged in?

In the first place, "APD" did not engage in "obfuscation";
Gordon Eden engaged in "obfuscation".  (he, or someone in his stead).

And part of the reason he can be expected to do it again,
is because he got away with it this time; the editors blamed APD for the effort to deliberately mislead the public, not Eden.

It is Eden, not "APD" needing to;

Who is this guy?

... learn at all levels that being frank with the public is one important way to rebuild the department’s credibility.

Eden's credibility is destroyed by his own doing; perhaps irrevocably.

Is it really up to the APD to rehabilitate Eden's credibility?

Or is it time to find a Chief whose credibility needs no rehab?

Speaking of candor, forthrightness and honesty - check out Eden's official APD website photo.

Statistics point to leadership failure in APS

In a committee meeting the other night, statistics, link, were presented that strongly suggest that the culture of fear of retaliation* against whistleblowers and other complainants is still a problem in the APS.  *Finding by Council of the Great City Schools auditors circa 2007.

There still is retaliation against whistleblowers and other complainants.

The leadership of the APS makes a big deal, link, about wanting people to report misconduct.  They have over the years, severely curtailed the kind of complaints they will accept. Now, they

... encourage state employees to report fraud, waste, and abuse of state resources. 

Suspected theft or misuse of the Department's property
Overcharging for products and services purchased at a lower rate
Billing for services never rendered
Double-billing or charging more than once for the same service

Intentional misuse of funds for other purposes
Conflicts of interest
Falsification of official documents (timesheets, leave reports, etc.)

The Hotline is not for general complaints, suggestions, or personnel issues. It is primarily a report intake operation focused on concerns at the state level. Issues involving local funds, programs, employees, etc. should be addressed with the Office of Equal Opportunity, Employee Assistance, Human Resources, school police your union, your department manager or other established channels before being reported to the Hotline.

I will take some credit for compelling them to narrow their focus.  I filed a number of complaints against the senior most administrators in the APS, by means of their whistleblower hotline; Ethical Advocate.  Their self-adjudication of, and subsequent dismissal of the complaints proved the lack of due process for complaints; sample link.

Rather than continue to suffer that, they simply stopped taking complaints about their ethical misconduct.

Rather like when they decide that they would rather not be held actually and honestly accountable as role models of students standards of conduct, they simple removed the role modeling clause from their own standards of conduct;

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

Their parting assurance;

"Employees wishing to report complaints are protected from retaliation."

That is simply not true.  The consistently high number of complaints of retaliation for exposing administrative and executive corruption or incompetence is evidence that retaliation against complainants continues and justifies the ongoing fear of retaliation.


If employees were polled and asked if they feel protected from retaliation if they report the incompetence or corruption of a superordinate, an overwhelming majority will tell you, no.

Don't hold your breath waiting for the poll.  The leadership of the APS does not collect data that might later prove to be embarrassing, shaming or indicting.  As a matter of routine; as a matter of course.

The profound lack of statistics of any kind at all, is as damning every bit as damning as damning statistics.

Where for example, are the statistics on student misconduct in schools, and in particular on chronically disruptive students?

Are things getting worse?  Are they getting better?
Who knows?  Why does no one know?
I'm guessing if things were getting better,
they would be collecting the data.

I'm guessing if employees really felt protected,
they would be collecting that data too.

APS graduation rates collapse

Gradation rates have collapsed in APS, dropping nearly 6.2% according to the Journal, 6.2%, link.  They arrived at that number according to the following calculation; 73.3% 2013 - 67.1% 2014 = 6.2%.

A truer representation of the collapse is gained by dividing the decline by 73.3; 
73.3% 2013 - 67.1% 2014) = 6.2% / 73.3 = .085 or 8.5%.

The results were made available one week too late to be part of the political discourse in the school board election.

The collapse points to the unreliability of "graduation rates" as a measure of public school success link.

"No one at the top or middle levels has been fired as a consequence ..."

Joe Monahan wrote this morning about the reform in the Albuquerque Police Department.  He quoted 2010 candidate for governor Doug Turner;

... the problem is accountability. No one at the top or middle levels has been fired as a consequence of the department's issues."

and as a result, the culture of the APD is not going to reform. Turner has hit the nail on the head.

The reason cultures of incompetence and corruption never end (in New Mexico) is because too few of those whose incompetence and corruption characterize the culture, are ever held actually, honestly accountable for their incompetence and corruption.

Human beings by their nature yield to temptation. 
With little likelihood of being caught and less likelihood
of being punished, human beings yield to temptation.

The very worst possible thing you can do is to tell people
a behavior is unacceptable and then enable the misconduct
by providing no consequence.  If for no other reason than it
betrays the efforts of those who do try to live and work by the rules.

Ayn Rand

It is not justice or equal treatment that you grant to men when you abstain equally from praising men's virtues and from condemning men's vices. When your impartial attitude declares, in effect, that neither the good nor the evil may expect anything from you - whom do you betray and whom do you encourage?

Federal District Court rules against Esquivel and APS

In a ruling today, a Chief United States District Judge ruled against APS School Board Member Marty Esquivel and APS on three counts of eight counts in my complaint, link.  Of the five counts the Court dismissed, those claims are still alive against APS. The Court merely found Esquivel was not the proper defendant for those claims, which was fully expected.

The ruling represents yet another signal to the school board and taxpayers; it's time to stop pouring good money after bad into their litigation against the public interests.

Three quarters of a million
dollars have been wasted already.

How many more will they waste
in a non-viable defense of
Marty Esquivel's ego?

That decision will be made in
another meeting in secret.

As is their want, practice and custom,
there will be no oversight over their spending and there will be no recording of their meeting made.




photo Mark Bralley

APS facing "big deficit"

The budget won't be reduced;
it will "not increase" by as much as they had planned.

They claim its all do to rising costs of running schools.

The announcement, link, was made the day after the school board election.

Journal post election editorial

It is the want and practice of Journal editors to weigh in in the days after a school board election in an editorial harrumph bewailing poor voter turnout .  And they have again, link.

There were few grains in the chaff;

• (low voter turnout) does not serve the candidates or the students, teachers, administrators or taxpayers who depend on our public schools.

• At APS, the board is entrusted with overseeing policy for more than 90,000 students, 11,500 employees and 136 schools and an annual budget of $1.3 billion.

• Voter fatigue and apathy aside, this level of turnout is unacceptable.

• ... there is a way to make it better; ...changing when school board elections can be held.

Conspicuous in their absence from their analysis of reasons voters didn't vote;

• the Journal's own failure and or refusal to investigate and report upon an ethics, standards and accountability scandal in the leadership of the APS. and

• the Journal's own failure and or refusal to investigate and report upon credible evidence of a cover up of felony criminal misconduct involving senior APS administrators.

APS graduation rates "dip" 6.2%

In the Journal this morning, link, we find that APS graduation rates. which until this morning had been soaring, have actually "dipped" 6.2% instead.  One wonders at the timing of the release; after the school board election.

The Journal used the word "dip" for a reason.

The word "dip" was used to leave an impression and or
create a belief that is untrue or misleading.  To wit;

the magnitude of the decline is "inconsequential",
no "big deal".

The "collapse" in APS graduation rates represents fully
one third of the nearly 20% growth APS claimed by the board under Winston Brooks.

Someone at the Journal
would have you believe
that that's no big deal.

Let's start with Journal
Editor in Chief Kent Walz.




photo Mark Bralley

"... just leveling the playing field", says McClesky.

Political adviser Jay McClesky
.

In the Journal this morning, link; the first details about Gov Susana Martinez' involvement in the APS School Board election.

Gov Susana Martinez and her political adviser Jay McClesky are pushing the envelope on the meaning of "non-partisan" as it applies to school board elections.

McClesky admitted right up front; ... Korte’s criticisms of the Martinez’s agenda played a role in (Gov Martinez') unprecedented involvement in the election.

"Kathy Korte chose to make her campaign a referendum against meaningful education reform supported by Gov. Martinez and boasted about receiving thousands of dollars from unions, so the governor wanted to ensure that Peggy Muller-Aragon had the support she needed to level the playing field.”

Update; In a comment left on the Journal report, Kathy Korte claims the Martinez McClesky team out spent her 5 to 1;  $40K to $8K.

Their conduct begs a question;

Is it appropriate for the Office of the Governor to be influencing the outcome of a local election?

Should Martinez be throwing her weight around in a local school board election?  Or for that matter, in any local election?  State Auditor Tim Keller endorsed in the district 4 contest.  Should any elected use their office to endorse any candidate?

The list is long.  And, also a matter of public record.

Perhaps the Journal will investigate and report on by name,  
all of the electeds who used the influence of their elected office in an effort to affect the outcome of a school board election.

School board elections non-partisan? Right,
and a pint of Haagen-Dazs serves four.




photo Mark Bralley

Open letter to community leaders

In particular, leaders of communities who feel left out of the decision making concerning their interests in the Albuquerque Public Schools.

As you know, decision making at the executive and administrative levels is an exercise of power as opposed to, for example, reason.  The balance of power on the board will change next month.  Teachers will have a bigger seat at the table, as will Governor Susana Martinez and Education Secretary Hanna Skandera.  Your interests will become less important.

Your "seat at the table" will continue to be;

two minutes at public forum fewer than 24 times a year. If there are more than 15 of you, you will get only one minute. If there are more than 30 of you, some of you will lose your opportunity entirely.

There are two community members on the APS Audit Committee. They function as members of the committee. They move the needle in decision making at the committee level in the decision making process.

Why not have community member seats on all committees?

If your interests are being decided in any committee, why can't you expect to be there to articulate and defend them?

It’s called participative decision making, wikipedia.

It’s not rocket science.

It requires only the real willingness of politicians and public servants to share the power entrusted to them by the people with whom they will not share it.

It isn’t “their” power. They aren’t “their” resources.
Of necessity, we have surrendered “control over” our power and resources, not ownership.  The power and resources they spend still belong fundamentally to the people; not to politicians and public servants.

They can give back at least some control by providing a regular opportunity for open and honest two-way discussion of important issues. There is no good and ethical reason there cannot be candid, forthright and honest discussions between the leadership of the APS and the communities and community members they serve.

The only real obstacle is their individual and collective resistance to empowering stake and interest holders.

You have a right to participate meaningfully at every committee meeting where your interests are being disposed. Your future free exercise of that right depends on your willingness to defend it now.

Lacking a good and ethical justification for denying communities and community members their meaningful input in decision making, the school board is stonewalling the issue.
They are simply pretending the issue has not been raised.

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

Right now the leadership is ignoring you and your right to participate.
They could never get away with further belittleing you.
The fight is upon you.

Because your cause is self evidently and so manifestly righteous, you will win the fight.

The only way you can lose the fight is to not show up.

You will pick a side when you don't pick a side.
Your silence will give your consent.

Show up at the next public forum.
Insist upon an open and honest public discussion of the petition for community member seats on school board committees.

There is no equivalent gesture.
There will be no better time.

"The right time to do the right thing is always right now." unk

I am grateful for your time and attention.

The future of decision making in the APS

Now that Gov Susana Martinez
and her Secretary of Education
Hanna Skandera have a seat
at the table; expect that the
school board will accept their
testing mandates a little less noisily.

And now that the teachers union has a seat at the table; expect union members' agenda to advance with less opposition as well.

Clearly power has shifted.  The formerly less powerful won seats at the table. The decisions will have a different flavor but there will be no change in the decision making model;

Board members and their interests will struggle over enough power to make the needle move in decision making.

The needle will move according to the will of the most powerful.

Still; might will make right.

Human beings when given power tend to abuse it.
It's the part of human nature of which Socrates wrote when arguing that power corrupts.

One of the manifestations of the corruption of power is the unwillingness to share the power; not even with the communities and community members to whom the power fundamentally belongs.

Neither new school board member has said a word about participatory decision making in the leadership of the public schools.  Nothing about community members seats on school board subcommittees.  Nothing about delegating power and resources down to where they are needed.

Nowhere in their plan, is a change in the decision making model.

Speaking of which; the school board intends to meet in secret tonight, link.

IX. Consideration for Approval to Convene in Executive Session Pursuant to the Open Meetings Act NMSA 1978 (§ 10-15-1 (H)(7)) for the Purpose of Discussing Matters Subject to the Attorney-Client Privilege Pertaining to Pending Litigation; Albuquerque Journal, et al. v. Board of Education of Albuquerque Public Schools, et al. and Threatened Litigation Related to Former Superintendent Brooks (Action)

The above represents their effort to be "reasonably specific".
Under the law; the NM Open Meetings Act, the board is required to be "reasonably specific" when they tell us what they intend to decide in secret from us. 

Reasonably specific can mean at least two things.
To the leadership of the APS, if it suits their interests,
it means sharing as little truth as the law absolutely demands.

The polar opposite approach, sharing as much truth as the law will allow better serves the interests of the people whose power and resources are being spent.

They could have been more specific about what they intend to do tonight and still not run afoul of the intention of the law.  The law allows them to be more candid, more forthright and more honest.

They could, without breaking the law have announced;

• We intend to meet in secret tonight to decide how much money we are going to spend in litigation to prevent the exposure of public records that we want to hide.  
• The money will come from operational funds; money that could, would, and should be spent in classrooms instead of on; cost is no object litigation against the public interests.
• The amount of money we can spend is unlimited and is keep largely secret as well.
• We will make our decision without oversight*.
• We will not record our decision making.  There will be no record made that might be asked for by a judge at some later date.

*Neither self oversight nor subordinate oversight are oversight;
they are oxymora.

An aspect of governance of the APS that will not change is the enabling of the lack of real transparency by the establishment's press; the Journal and the NMBA affiliates.

Despite overwhelming evidence and credible testimony, they relentless refusal to investigate and report on the ethics, standards and accountability scandal in the leadership of the APS.

Not that it makes any difference with regard to his responsibility to inform the democracy, but Journal Editor in Chief Kent Walz is twixt a rock and a hard place.

Before he can report credibly on the ongoing standards and accountability crisis in the leadership of the APS, he has first to report credibly on his failure to report credibly on the crisis heretofore.

He's known about the cover up of felony criminal misconduct since February 2007, link. He's been complicit in or complacent about the cover up of the cover up ever since.  Any ignorance he might claim,can only be willful and deliberate.

He has willfully permitted or negligently allowed the leadership of the APS to cover up an ethics and accountability scandal for eight years.

All Walz and the Journal have to do, is to ask the leadership of the APS two simple questions and then report on the response.

1. To what standards are you accountable? and
2. by what due process are you accountable?

Tell the truth about APS?

All Walz has to do is ask the
questions and report on the
responses.

It's "newsworthy" either way,
though way too late to play
in the elections.

Walz and the Journal don't
have to do a damn thing except
ask, read, and report.

Before we hire a new superintendent, s/he and we need to know

1.  if the standards of conduct and competence are high enough, clear and unequivocal enough, to protect the public interests in the public schools.

And s/he and we need to know

2.  if there is due process* for complaints filed against school board members and administrators.

*Will there be a principled resolution of any complaint filed against powerful politicians and public servants?  Will there be a process free of their undue influence, and powerful enough to hold them actually, honestly accountable even against their will?

Is the new superintendent going to clean house
or continue sweeping the dirt under the rug?

Another fair question the Journal won't be asking.




photos Mark Bralley

Journal steps up coverage of school board contest

Truth be told, the Journal has devoted more column inches to this school board contest than any other I remember. Which is not to say, they have spent nearly enough.

Mark Twain warned;

 "never pick a fight with a man 
who buys his ink by the barrel"

Yet, here we go.

I assume Mark Twain meant;
When someone like Journal Editor in Chief Kent Walz gets his dander up, he can do enormous damage to messages and messengers regardless of their merits of the message or the messenger.

If the message is true and conflicts with their own interests; powerful people jump first to defaming the messenger top draw attention from the message.  If they must, they will begrudgingly  acknowledge the message.

Their attacks on messengers need not be germane or even accurate.  Who is going to hold him accountable; how and where and when?



Consider the damage he and the Journal (and KOB TV) have done to Kathy Korte's campaign and the message she carries in the fight over testing gone wild.

Their coverage; link, link, about campaign fliers being placed on windshields at a funeral amounts to "yellow journalism" wikilink, pure and simple.

Beside defaming the messengers, there is another way that a man with a barrel of ink can use his ink to prevail; he can use the ink to report on red herring instead.

He can use it on "record coverage" and even on an editorial, link, before the election.

If the goal getting out the vote, which would be the better strategy;

• Encouraging voters to participate and offering rudimentary coverage of generally accepted issues.

or,

• investigating and reporting upon more important questions;

such as;

Are the ethics, standards and accountability that apply to school board members and superintendents high enough and, is their accountability actual and honest enough, to protect the people's interests in the public schools?

Clearly, if the answer is no; then the answer is "newsworthy".
It is newsworthy in particular, on the eve of an election.

If the answer is yes, ethics, standards and accountability are high, it is just as "newsworthy".  It would underscore the effectiveness and efficiency of the leadership of the APS; school board members and superintendents and would encourage voters to keep them on the job.

What do you intend to do with regard to participatory decision making in the leadership of the Albuquerque Public Schools?

• Will you support the addition of community member seats on APS School Board Committees?  
• Will you there, engage in good faith in a guided discussion toward principled resolutions of community issues with the APS?
• Will you engage in open and honest two-way communication with the communities and community members you serve?
• Why not?

Why will you not produce the ethically redacted findings of investigations into allegations of felony criminal involvement of APS senior administrators in the abuse of a federal criminal database and misappropriate of money in evidence?

Not "how"; why?

"How?" is by spending against the public interests; wholly unjustifiable numbers operational dollars on legal weaselry in an effort to hide the ethically redacted truth from stake and interest holders; tax payers foremost among them.

Explain your abandonment of your responsibilities as the senior-most role models of standards of conduct you establish and enforce upon students?

• How can you expect students to model and promote honest accountability to nationally recognized, accepted and respected code of ethical conduct; the Pillars of Character Counts!, while you spend millions of dollars every year litigating exceptions for yourselves even from the law; the standards of conduct that all higher standards of conduct are higher than?

Even in the "record coverage" of a school board election, Walz and the Journal steadfastly refused to investigate and report upon a number of relevant issues.

They are the very sort of issues and reporting that compelled the founding fathers, in order that their democracy be informed, to protect in their very First Amendment to the Constitution, Walz' and others' human right to report the truth candidly, forthrightly and honestly.

Yet where Mark Twain still watching, he would still offer;

"If you don't read the Journal, you're uninformed.
If you do read the Journal, you're misinformed." derived - of course

Walz is complicit in, or willfully ignorant of, an effort by a handful of powerful people to influence the outcome of a school board election.  Joe Monahan touched on the problem this morning in a post on New Mexico Politics, link;

"... the Guv's political machine to unleash(ed) withering attacks on one of its most dreaded foes--ABQ School Board member Kathy Korte.

... there has been a veritable fusillade of attacks on Korte from the machine-friendly press, in the mailboxes and at school board meetings ...

Your only opportunity to keep the election from the whims of a few political heavy hitters, is not only to vote, but to get as many others to vote as you are able.




photos Mark Bralley 

 ----------------------------------------------------------------

Longtime friend and reader
James Douglass Robertson
passed a week ago.

He commented on posts on
occasion, but he always
delivered one observation
face to face;

Your posts are too damn long!

He would have thought this post was too damn long as well.
It seems fitting to dedicate it to his memory, if only to provoke him one last time.  Aside from that
may he rest in the peace he earned.

Despite what they say, there really are "students who can't learn"

There are those who are fond of saying "every student can learn". It is roughly equivalent to arguing “it doesn't rain on parades.” Sometimes it does. Some students can't learn.

Among them; students who are not present. Whether by their chronic truancy or by their momentary inattention, students who are not present are “students who can't learn”. Similarly, those who don’t want to learn for any reason whatsoever, are “students who can't learn”.

When people talk about no child being unable to learn, I suppose that they are thinking longitudinally; over the long term. Over the long term they believe, a child can be neither so profoundly damaged nor so deeply disadvantaged, that they cannot learn. I don't believe that, but it’s beside the point. We need to be looking at learning, not in toto, but as an accumulation of momentary opportunities.

A child, who is able to learn, can learn only for the length of time that they are both present and wanting to learn. Even children who are routinely present and for the most, wanting to learn, spend a certain amount of the day every day, daydreaming, distracted or rebelling for some reason or another.

"A certain amount of the day" varies from student to student, classroom to classroom, and school to school. All of the “certain amounts of the day” add up to an astonishingly large part of the day.

Anyone who has not tried to teach a class

of thirty children with little more in common than their approximate age and socioeconomic status; sitting in five rows of six desks, each of them on the same page in the same book (that they can't read all that well), studying for the same test they will all take together on the same day,

has no idea how much of the day is wasted by students who are unengaged in their learning.

Education is not something one does “to” a learner. And, certainly not without their cooperation. The finest teacher imaginable, cannot make a horse “want” to drink.

Making education palatable to immature minds would be a huge step forward. Making education desirable gets us to the finish line. In order to do that, we are going to have to individualize their learning paths; in direction and speed.

It is time to stop trying to standardize the individual academic performances of thousands of learners. It is time to stop trying to standardize the performances of even two.

By creating independent lifelong learners at the earliest opportunity, by taking advantage of children's intrinsic motivation to learn, we will increase the likelihood creating large numbers of students who will be productively engaged in learning of some kind. They won’t be disrupting classrooms because they can't keep up.

We will create students who only occasionally actually need the attention of a "teacher", and when they do, that teacher will have the time to give that student individual attention because s/he will not be otherwise engaged in trying to keep 29 children all in step in a "learning line-dance".

We have made a deliberate choice to

• standardize the individual educational growth of children with nothing more in common than their approximate age,

at the cost of

• providing learning that is fun and interesting enough to maintain and reinforce the intrinsic motivation children bring to learning.

Based on that truth, we should be doing everything we can do, within reason of course, to make learning fun and interesting. Fun and interesting, the diametric opposite of standardized learning, standardized tests, and standardized testing.

It should be a fundamental tenet of education and learning; In the interests of rapid growth; if ever there are two or more ways to legitimately learn something, allow the student to choose between them, even if they pick on the basis of which is going to be the most "fun".

For those who think "suffering" should be part of learning and earning a diploma just like "it was in their day"; simply require graduates, in exchange for their diploma, to walk five miles uphill in snow and bare footed to retrieve it.

APS School Board's enforcement of Code of Ethics on Korte's conduct; selective at best

In the Journal this morning, coverage of the latest APS School Board spat, link.

They report;

The Albuquerque Public Schools board executive committee has sent a letter to board member Kathy Korte saying she violated APS’ code of ethics when she reprimanded spokeswoman Monica Armenta in recent emails.

The Journal reports

The executive committee’s letter told Korte her emails violated APS’ code of ethics, which states board members should “delegate authority for the administration of the schools to the superintendent and establish a process for accountability of administrators.”

The words,

“delegate authority for the administration of the schools to the superintendent and establish a process for accountability of administrators.”  

are a cut and paste from the School Board Code of Ethics, link.
For the Executive Committee to call it "APS' Code of Ethics" is misleading.

Heretofore, the board's code of ethics was utterly unenforceable.  There was no venue where a complaint could be filed against them for violations of the code.  There was no place where a complainant would find due process; a principled resolution based on impartial adjudication and fully free of appearances of impropriety and conflicts of interests, and fear of retaliation.

Now we find that their code is enforceable after all.
All they have to do is to convene an in secret meeting of three board members (one short of a quorum) and decide to take action.

The letter... was signed by the three members of the board’s executive committee – President Analee Maestas, Vice President Don Duran and Secretary Steven Michael Quezada.

Their code of conduct can be enforced,
albeit selectively and only upon each other.

Korte is guilty of violating the School Board's Code of Ethics.

“I do hate meddling in APS employee affairs,” Korte said.

Good for her.  At least she "hates"it when circumstances make it "necessary" for her to violate their Code of ethics.

and;

Their letter to Korte said that if she chose not to alter her behavior, “the executive committee’s concerns will be brought to the full board for consideration of formal action by the Board of Education regarding your refusal or inability to adhere to these standards.”  emphasis added

Their legitimate course of action in the first place; before the letter of reprimand is written and delivered.
 
Outgoing School Board Member
Marty Esquivel offered;

"It is important that other board members respond in a “swift and firm” manner so other employees can be assured a similar thing won’t happen to them."

Noteworthy; in the eight years
Esquivel has been on the board,
his resistance to school board
members being actually, honestly
accountable for their conduct
has cost the operational fund
nearly a million dollars.

School Board Member Lorenzo
Garcia stood in support of a
discussion in a meeting, saying

“We need to talk about it.”

Board member David Peercy's contribution;

“It’s not a big deal, and that’s the point,” Peercy said. “You’ve got to realize just because we have things we need to discuss – it’s OK.”

Peercy misses the point entirely.

Or, he would rather we miss the point entirely.

It isn't a big deal that you
"have things to discuss",
it is your relentless insistence
on discussing public interests
in meetings in secret that is a
"big deal".

Anything a politician or public servant does in unnecessary secret from the people they serve, is a "big deal".

“I have no idea what board
member Korte was specifically
upset about,” Armenta said
in an interview Friday.

For her part, "victim" and APS
Exec Director of Communications
Monica Armenta can't imagine
what all the fuss is about.

She would have us believe;

she never asked Marilyn Beck
any untoward questions, ever.




photos Mark Bralley

------------------------------------------------------------------

I took the liberty of posting a comment directly on the Journal report.  It read;

The Executive Committee, Maestas, Duran and Quesada, have the authority ONLY to put Korte's chastisement on the agenda of a meeting that complies with the NM OMA. The gang of three, not even a quorum under the law, have no more legitimate authority to chastise Korte, than Korte has to chastise Beck.

All of this illuminates the ethics, standards and accountability crisis in the senior-most leadership of the APS. And, points to the need for an independent examination and review of executive and administrative standards and accountability.

It should be done and made public before they hire the next superintendent.

The scandal requires investigation and report by the Journal. It's what they're supposed to do. It's the reason why they enjoy Constitutional protection of their human right to be the press, in order that they can tell the people how their power and their resources are being spent. That so voters can hold politicians and public servants accountable for their conduct and competence in their public service.

Truancy; before and after

Truancy interferes with any model for educating children and requiring them to be in a certain place at a certain time doing the same thing everybody else is doing.

In public schools; schools where standardizing learning is the priority; students must be seated in one of thirty desks in five rows of six; cemetery seating.  There to be educated in unison with twenty nine other kids of approximately the same age and nothing much else in common.  There is no change in sight.

We can address truancy before it happens or after.
The one so much preferable to the other.

Truants are truant in general, for one of two reasons;

1. reasons beyond their control, and
2. because school sucks.

For too many students, school is hard and not much fun.
Except for opportunity to goof around with friends, largely
without regard for the learning of other students,
they see nothing for them at school.

To some extent, there is little to be done about that;
sometimes life is neither fun nor interesting and immature souls will rebel.  They will not work hard; they will not even attend; no matter what you do after they are truant.

On the other hand, we could agree that as long as reasonable standards are met, public school education should be as fun and interesting and individualized as it can be made.

Why not?

Primarily because standardization of individual educational performance is the top priority and more important than creating independent lifelong learners at the earliest opportunity.

The most disturbing aspect of truancy in the APS is that "they" are going to talk about every possible solution except abandoning cemetery seating, standardized tests and standardized testing; likely the single best solution they could ever consider.

There is a necessary and perhaps inevitable choice to be made between individualization and standardization in public school education.

Consequently there is a need for open and honest discussion about the mission of the APS.  Should we continue to focus our energy and resources on the effort to standardize learning, or can we consider instead, individualizing learning; creating independent lifelong learners at the earliest opportunity?

The switch from standardization to individualization of necessity entails delegating power and resources.  School Boards and superintendents and assistant superintendents will not surrender willingly, the power they hold.  It's not the way they roll; it isn't in human nature.

They will resist however and wherever they can.

Primarily by stonewalling; pretending they don't know that there's a question before them.

Expect considerable foot dragging as well, from the people who sell standardized tests and standardized testing services worth millions and millions of dollars every year.

APS School Board Member chairs really did cost taxpayers a bundle

In 2007, the "leadership" of the APS was about building for themselves, a fancy new board room in the bowels of their castle keep at 6400 Uptown Blvd.

Though there were real needs elsewhere for the capital funds they spent at 6400 Uptown, they built an utterly unjustifiable board room and went over budget.

I was informed that they paid more than $800 dollars a piece for the leather chairs behind the dais.  I have been trying ever since, to find out if the report was true.

I even asked APS Supt Winston Brooks during a press conference, if the report was true.

He became very upset at the question but promised me the truth "by noon".

I'm still waiting.

When APS hosted the candidate forum in the John Milne Community Board Room, I found myself randomly and ironically, sitting in Marty Esquivel's seat. I was able to obtain a model number from the bottom of a chair.

I contacted the manufacturer/dealer to inquire about the cost of the chair and was told;

The 5252 part number belongs to the Leader Upholstered chair. Unfortunately this chair has been discontinued but I can recommend the Leader Knit chair or the ReAlign chair as a replacement.

Those two fabric chairs before taxes run $950 to $1,212 for the Leader Knit, and $657 for the ReAlign, link.

APS Interim Supt Brad Winter will not tell us how much he paid for the chairs board members sit in twice a month for two hours.  At this point, $800 looks low.  Winter may have personally authorized a thousand dollars a piece for those chairs when at the same time, students at Susie Rayos Marmon Elementary School were attending classes in worn out portables with leaking roofs.

Winter steadfastly refuses to produce a candid, forthright an honest accounting of spending at 6400 Uptown.

Millions of dollars were spent sprucing up the twins.  They were spent at a time when auditors found in the APS Financial Department;

1. inadequate standards
2. inadequate accountability to such standards as there were, and
3. inadequate record keeping

the trifecta of public corruption, embezzlement and fraud.

The Journal steadfastly refuses to investigate and report upon credible allegations and evidence of an ethics, standards and accountability crisis in the leadership of the APS.

Even in the face of a school board election and the hiring of Winter's replacement.

To their everlasting shame.




photos Mark Bralley

Journal endorsement baseless?

This is not about whom the editors endorsed (or didn't) link.

It is about the basis of their endorsement.

I aver and allege, their entire endorsement is based on the responses candidates wrote to six questions asked by the Journal.  Candidates were given 50 words; the equivalent of 20 seconds, to answer.

The editors did not actually interview a single candidate.

They chose to not cover stories that would influence voters, including but not limited to;

• The ethics, standards and accountability crisis and scandal in the leadership of the APS, or

• the possibility of community member seats on school board committees.

The endorsed candidates whom they may well never have even met.

They endorsed a candidate who on page one they write, link;
they must sue in District Court in order to compel to tell the simple truth about her stewardship of the people's trust and treasure.


I will bow of course, as usual, to controverting evidence.

Push back on the IPRA; time to fight?

In the Journal, link,

"New Mexico State University plans to propose extensive changes to restrict the reach of the state’s public records law – amendments that transparency advocates call “troubling” and vow to fight."

The people's power and resources will be spent in an effort to further insulate the people whose power and resources they are, from the ethically redacted truth about how they are being wielded and spent.

The power and resources belong to the people.  The whole truth about how they are being spent, belongs to the people.  Some parts of the truth enjoy ethical redaction.  The rest are subject to rather immediate production.

"NMSU President and former Gov. Garrey Carruthers said the effort stems from the university’s recent experience hiring a new athletics director.

... several qualified candidates pulled out of the running when they knew their names could be made public."

The government in the person of Garry Carruthers describes as still "qualified"; candidates whose basic dishonesty is evident to the eye.

How candid, forthright and honest are those "qualified" wo/men being with their current stake and interest holders?

What about the trust those people have placed in men and women who are hiding the truth
about their intention to stay where they are?

If the people created open meetings and public records laws from scratch, this is not what they would have come up with.  We got here because we failed to notice how bad it was getting and for how long; the people aren't feeling the heat.

In so far as sunshine is a disinfectant,
darkness is a disease; a most infectious disease.

The terms of public service are the prerogative of the people, not of the servants.


This is a boiling frog, wikilink, moment in government in New Mexico.  This the place where the people are supposed to stand up and say no.

We cannot sit back and do nothing while control over our power and resources slips further and further from our grasp.

It only begins with hiding the truth.  There is a tipping point.
At some point it really will be too late to act.

If not us, then who?
If not now, then when?”― John E. Lewis

"... as we approach an off-the-radar, Feb. 3 school board election ...",

wrote, outgoing APS
School Board Member
Marty Esquivel in the
Journal in December,
in his I'm outta here
op-ed farewell, link.

Begging a question;

why is the February school board election
admittedly "off-the-radar"*?

*forgotten; ignored

Followed by; How can that be?
Skipping ahead through; who is keeping it off the radar?
to What and or who is the radar?

The "radar" are the pages in the Journal and segments of broadcast TV.

The school board election, more importantly the issues in the school board election are being kept "off the pages" of the newspaper and "off the broadcasts" of TV news.

They are kept off by the likes of the Journal and Journal Editor in Chief Kent Walz, and  by the NM Broadcasters Association affiliate stations; KRQE, KOAT, and KOB TV and their news directors and or owners.

The "radar" in this context doesn't include the small fry of the press, or even newspaper and TV reporters.   None of them swing a big enough bat to keep anything off the radar.

Truth be known, none of them swing a big enough bat to put something on the radar against the will of the establishment's press.

Walz and the like, whose nearly sacred obligation it is to inform the democracy; to keep elections on-the-radar haven chosen otherwise.

Those whose duty it is to spend their barrels of ink and hours of broadcasting reporting candidly, forthrightly and honestly on the spending of the peoples resources and the wielding of the power by school board members and superintendents have chosen otherwise.

Esquivel went on to wonder;

"... why the governance of our most important
public institution gets so little voter attention 
when there is so much at stake."

in the Albuquerque Journal; a newspaper that hasn't
really promoted a school board election ever;
whose surreptitious self interests are served apparently,
by little voter attention in School Board elections.

Are they complicit in the cover up of an ethics, standards and accountability scandal?  Are they complacent?  Are they waiting for the scandal to ripen*?

*Not reporting a disaster,
so they can report on a bigger disaster.
Not reporting a small fire
so they can report on a bigger fire.




photo Mark Bralley

One of my opponents enjoys the support of some powerful politicians

The have invested some political capital in my opponent's interests in the election.

I am wondering if any one of them would like to invest some political capital in support of something that would serve everyone's interests; participatory decision making at the committee level in the leadership of the APS.

Seats for communities and community members
on APS School Board Committees.

Gut check time.

"Community members seats" surprisingly hard to sell

I have been trying for awhile to explain to groups of people who feel left out of decision making, that they can have seats at APS school board committee meetings; that the seats are there for the taking.

It doesn't seem to resonate.

Part of the problem is the jump from endorsing the possibility of community member seats to the possibilities of failure; what if, what if, what if.  We lose sight of the forest for the trees.

The question is not;
can participatory decision making at the committee level be made to work?

The question is;

Do we want participatory decision making at the committee level to work? 

Do school board members and superintendents really want to sit at roundtables with representatives of communities and community members and engage in open and honest two-way communication with the communities and community members they serve?

If school board members really want to establish more seats at the table, you could ask them;

do you support community member seats
on APS school board committees?

they would answer "yes". I do.

Any answer except yes,
including not answering the question at all,
means no.

There is no time, no day, no place where communities and community members have the close attention of the leadership of the APS.  No venue where they can expect to engage in any open and honest two-way communication between the leadership of the APS and the people they serve.

There is no place where the leadership of the APS are expected to respond candidly, forthrightly and honestly to legitimate questions about the public interests and their public service.

There are two seats on the Audit Committee; already, in school board policy.

It was pointed out in the recognition ceremony for the newest community member on the Audit Committee, that she had gotten the seat by "raising her hand".

A perfectly reasonable prerequisite of taking one's seat
at the table where one's interests are at stake.

Clear choice in school board election

Candidates who want to govern
with good intention. They promise to wield our
power and spend our resources with our interests
first. But they still intend to govern.
or

Candidates who stand in support of returning control 
over power and resources to those whose 
power and resources they are.

Candidates who would hold close, the control over
our power and resources to spend according to their
"good intention".
or

Candidates who would delegate resources and decision
making power to the lowest practical level.

Those who have voiced no objection to
decision making in meetings in secret
from interest and stakeholders.
or

Those would create community member seats on
all school board committees.

Those whose silence gives consent to the ethics, standards and
accountability crisis in the leadership of the APS.
or

Those who insist upon an immediate independent
 examination and review of executive and administrative
ethics standards and accountability in the APS.

Those who would then consider the findings of the review
in meetings in secret redacting as much of the truth
as the law and legal weaselry will allow.
or

Those would would consider the findings in open and
honest public discussion; redacting only what
the spirit of the law absolutely requires.

Those who hold the truth as if it were their own,
producing only what the law absolutely requires.
or

Those who advocate for transparency limited only
by reading the law ethically.

Those would rather have their own hand on the tiller,
piloting the district according to their "good intention".
or

Those who would change the
direction of the APS by
changing the decision making
model to participatory decision
making; government of, by,
and for the people.

Can you handle the truth? 

Can you help steer the boat?

Act in support of community member seats on school board committees.

Act like you care.

photo Mark Bralley

Rules mean little to would be senior-most role models of student standards of conduct.

In the Journal District 4 profiles, link; please find evidence that the rules don't apply to everybody.

However onerous are the rules; they are nevertheless the rules.

One of the greatest obstacles for teachers and learning is the enforcement of rules that protect primarily, the rights of learners.

One of the greatest obstacles to the enforcement of rules is the permission of prohibited behavior.

When some are allowed to ignore the rules, then, in immature minds and reasoning; everyone is allowed to ignore the rules.  If not ignore, then "move" the line between the acceptable and the unacceptable.  The grayer the line, the harder it is to defend.

The rules of the Journal questionnaire and the process in general are onerous.  That positions on complicated issues can be explained in two minutes or fifty words, is self evident nonsense.  Fifty words, by the way, is the same as being given 20 seconds to respond to the question.

I protested the arbitrary and unreasonable constraint, and then I complied with it.

Not every other candidate did.

Those that did not, now owe students an explanation.
In words that every student can understand;

why are they expected to abide by the rules,
while you are not.

Why they are "expected to model and promote actual honest accountability to the Pillars of Character Counts!" a nationally recognized, accepted and respected code of ethical conduct, and you are not?

School board members and superintendents establish and enforce standards of conduct on students.

Do we, or not,
expect school board members and superintendents;
to show students and staff what that looks like
to hold oneself honest and actually accountable
to the same standards of conduct
they establish and enforce on students and staff?

There is not one single school board member or senior administrator who will stand up as role model of accountability to the Pillars of Character Counts!.  Not one who will stand up and swear;

I am ready and willing and able to show students what it looks like to hold oneself honestly accountability to standards of conduct including courage and character and honor.

If we really want children to grow into adults who embrace character and courage and honor, some one is going to show them what they look like.

Who is going to show students what willing accountability looks like?  All day every day, children are witness to begrudging accountability.  They grow increasingly and only begrudgingly accountable.  Is that want we want?

Somebody needs to do something and
that "somebody" cannot continue to be
somebody else.

Unk first observed;
What is everybody's job is nobody's job;

a short story about four people named 
Everybody, Somebody, Anybody, and Nobody. 
There was an important job to be done and 
Everybody was asked to do it. 
Everybody was sure Somebody would do it. 
Anybody could have done it, 
but Nobody did it.

Who is finally responsible for giving students the opportunity to make informed choices about the standards of conduct they will embrace as adults?

The very most basic question is;

Whether there are going to be honest to God role models for students and staff in the Albuquerque public schools.  Are we going to expect school board members and superintendents to model and promote honest actual accountability to the Pillars of Character Counts!*?

*or any other higher standards of conduct than the law; the standards of conduct that all "higher standards of conduct" are higher than.

This is only about Character Counts! because according to past and current school board policy, those happen to be the actual standards of conduct for students in the APS.

This isn't really about  CC! per se.  This is about actual accountability to any standards of conduct at all that require their candor, forthrightness and honesty with stake and interest holders.

They, the school board and Journal et al,
are not going to bring up ethics, standards and accountability in the leadership of the APS.

Therefore, you must.

Insist upon an independent examination and review of ethics, standards and accountability in the leadership of the APS.

Insist that the findings be produced to public knowledge
before the next superintendent is hired.

Journal coverage; District 4

In the Journal this morning, link, a report on the contest in District 4.

About me was written;

A key part of candidate Charles “Ched” MacQuigg’s appeals to voters is that he wants to make the board more responsive to community and teacher input.

MacQuigg, 64, a former APS teacher, said he would like the district to hire an outside entity to conduct an ethics review of APS administration and its practices.

MacQuigg sued the district because the school board told him he could not attend board meetings, saying his behavior was disruptive. He vehemently denies his behavior was disruptive. A District Court judge granted a temporary injunction allowing him to return to board meetings.

To which I would add;
Not only do I vehemently deny that I ever disrupted school board meetings or did any of the other things they allege, but there is not one shred of actual evidence to support any of their allegations that I did.

And that the Chief Judge of the Federal District Court who reviewed the evidence found;

• "... that it was what Plaintiff said rather than any non-verbal conduct that offended the Board and led to his expulsion."

• "There is no serious question here that the speech that Plaintiff typically engages in at Board meetings constitutes protected speech."

• "... that although Plaintiff’s remarks were addressed to individual Board members and APS administrators, his remarks could not reasonably have been understood as personal attacks on the persons to whom they were addressed."

• ... the justifications offered by the Board are pretexts masking viewpoint discrimination.

The Journal chose to not report that taxpayers have spent nearly three-quarters of a million dollars on a non-viable defense in search of yet more admissions of no guilt.

Korte Armenta brouhaha - tip of an iceberg

The now public spat between School Board Member and candidate Kathy Korte and the $110K a year Executive Director Monica Armenta, link, is quite literally the tip of an iceberg;

Below the surface; yet to see the light of day in any Journal investigation and report;

• Winter and the good ol' boys and girls' oligarchical structure doesn't include a venue where an Executive Director can question the performance of a subordinate without incurring the personal wrath of a school board member.  Or they could point to it.

• Winter and the good ol' boys oligarchy doesn't provide a venue where an Executive Director can question the performance of a subordinate without incurring the personal wrath of a school board member. Or they could point to it.

  This though School Board members are often reminded specifically and explicitly; they are not to be throwing their weight around any where any time except during legitimate meetings of the school board.

• There is no place in the entire APS where an employee can file a complaint, and where that complaint is guaranteed due process.  Or they could point to it.

• The leadership of the APS spends millions of operational dollars every year, litigating their way out of accountability even to the law by means of expensive admissions of no guilt settlement with complaints who trade cash for personal vindication.   Or they would deny it.

• There is no place where an employee can file a complaint against an administrator or school board member and where that is free of the appearances of conflicts of interests and impropriety.  Or they could point to it.

• That there is a culture of fear of retaliation against complainants and whistleblowers.  Or they would deny it.

• That there is an ongoing and deeply rooted culture that enables public corruption and incompetence by failing to provide actual honest accountability to meaningful standards of conduct and competence in politics and public service in the APS. Or they could point to those standards and to their actual and honest accountability to them.

• That Korte and the school board to this day relentlessly refuse to talk openly and honestly about the standards of conduct that bind them and their actual honest accountability to them, points to their lack of courage and or competence.  Or they would discuss openly and honestly; their standards and their accountability to them.

• It ended up in the newspaper; ergo Interim Superintendent Brad Winter and the good ol' boys aren't doing as wonderful a job as the Journal editors would have you believe, link.

If school board member Kathy Korte or any other school board member thought employees needed protection from administrators, she and they should have provided it for all employees long ago, and not just now and not just for her and their political allies.




photos Mark Bralley