APS Leadership dodges accountability; as a matter of course.

The Leadership of the APS has a statewide reputation for dodging accountability. This fact is routinely acknowledged every time taxpayers are asked to support education with new taxes. Governor Richardson referred in an op-ed piece before the Sepember bond issue, to a persuasive argument that these eight individuals have “a long history of dodging accountability when it comes to managing (their) finances and modernizing schools.” Voters are asked to think of the students and their needs; and not to think about their misgivings about the men and women whom they must trust with their money.


APS Leaders would like to continue to dodge accountability for their past.

Before the school tax vote next February 6th, voters will be asked to think about the maintenance needs of aging and dilapidated school houses. Again voters will be asked not to hold children accountable for the sins of APS Administrators and Board Members.

And for at least the third election in a row, the Leadership of the Albuquerque Public Schools will dodge accountability for the administrative corruption and incompetence that wastes so many tax dollars. It will not be a ballot issue, it will not even be discussed.

For ten board meetings in a row, APS Leaders have been asked to hold themselves honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct. Their response is to stonewall. They just ignore the question. And then the broadcast version of the school board meeting is deliberately edited to remove their response; to misrepresent the truth; to avoid accountability.

The issue of the lack of accountability in the APS, should be part of the political discourse. It should effect decisions around the December 19th Filing Day for School Board candidates.

It will not. It will not because APS, Modrall, the Journal, and the Tribune are agreed that it will not be made public.

In whose interests?

There is nothing you can do about it

If you have to ask for someone’s permission to hold them accountable; they are not accountable.

If they create and maintain the ability to dodge accountability at will; they are not accountable.

Accountability is fatal to corruption and incompetence. Corruption and incompetence exist only because honest accountability does not. In the absence of accountability the public is protected only by the trustworthiness of public servants. When the trust is being betrayed; we are compelled to recognize that trust is a poor substitute for honest accountability.

It is not power that corrupts. It is the lack of accountability for the abuse of power that corrupts; absolutely.

APS Leadership has the wherewithal to dodge accountability. They can act against the public interest; and there’s nothing you can do about it.

Albuquerqueans watch APS board meetings in person or on TV. The broadcast version of the record has been repeatedly falsified. They have deliberately and methodically misrepresented the truth. APS’ Rigo Chavez says that it isn’t dishonest to deliberately misrepresent the truth to the community because, it isn’t the “official” record.

And there’s nothing you can do about it.

Except go to the next board meeting and defend the principle that public servants are honestly accountable to the public; and to a meaningful standard of conduct.

The goal

As an essential term of public service, public servants will be honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct. The terms of public in-servitude are the sole prerogative of the public, and not of the public servant.

The immediate objective is to compel the Leadership of the Albuquerque Public Schools to recognize the terms of their public service; that they will hold themselves accountable to a standard of conduct that protects the public interest.

This objective will be reached in one way. A number of people will assemble at a board meeting and present their demand to the Leadership of the Albuquerque Public Schools. If the number of people is large enough, the community will regain control over their power. Corruption and incompetence in the APS will end.

If the number of people is too small, when the question is asked;

As public servants, as stewards of public funds, and as the senior role models for employees and students; will you hold yourself honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct?

They will ignore the question.

And they will ignore their obligations as public servants, stewards of the public trust and treasure, and as role models for 98,000 of our sons and daughters.

George Washington and the cherry tree; new development

If you asked a Leader of the APS, did you chop down the cherry tree? If they answered they would say, through their lawyers, “Prove it.”

And then they would use a whole bunch of money to keep you from doing that. The money comes from people who think that their taxes are being spent in the best interests of children.

APS Leaders are spending money to protect their own interests. They’re doing it in diametric opposition to the interests of children.

Taxpayer trust is being betrayed.

But just you try to hold them accountable for it.

Open letter to Veronica Garcia, NM Secretary of Education

Re: IPR o6-220, 06-222, 06-223

I call your attention to complaints filed with the Educator Ethics Bureau. The complaints have been denied a principled resolution.

The scandal unfolds under your letterhead. I am offering you an opportunity to involve yourself appropriately.

The New Mexico Educator Ethics Bureau has ended its investigation of an allegation of ethics violations by APS Superintendent Elizabeth Everitt.

The investigation took three months and involved no investigation what so ever. There is no record that a single question was asked of anyone, ever.

Elizabeth Everitt was not even asked apparently, if the allegations were true or not.

Ms. Everitt never had to say; "Yes, it is true that I refuse to be held accountable to any meaningful standard of conduct. And in so doing, I violated not only the standard of the code of ethics for educators, but of any recognized, accepted, and respected code of ethics."

Nor did she have to say "No, the allegations are not true. My record is proof that by my personal example I have modeled honest accountability to a meaningful standard of conduct."

She told neither the truth nor a lie, and yet she was found innocent. Actually they didn’t use the word innocent, that would have been a lie, and on the record. So they said that I had not proved guilt.

I had offered that a code of ethics that requires accountability by personal example; is violated when a person refuses to be held accountable for their personal example.

Apparently that was not proof enough.
And then the custodian of public records helped to cover it all up.
Accountability has been dodged, leaving no trail at all.

Nobody said they weren’t good at it.

Stonewall; to refuse to cooperate with somebody by avoiding answering questions or providing information.

Stonewalling is what you have to do when a lie can no longer protect you from the truth.

Their record is one of dodging accountability. They can’t lie and say that they are accountable for their conduct.

They can’t tell the truth because the truth is that they really are not accountable to any meaningful standard of conduct.

Clearly, that is the way that they want things to remain.

So when you ask them if they are willing to be held honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct; they have to stonewall.

Their broadcast record of board meetings shows that, in the ten times that they have refused to answer the question,not one board member nor the superintendent looks into the eyes of their constituents as they dodge accountability. Not once.

Their answer is no, deal with it.

Suppose that instead of stonewalling, the Leadership of the Albuquerque Public Schools actually answered the question. What if when asked, in your public service, will you hold yourself honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct; they said “no”

What if they said, “No; we won’t be held accountable to ANY standard of conduct. Deal with it.”

What would you do?

You need to think about that, because that’s what happened.

Unless you think stonewalling adequately answers the question.

Any answer except yes, is no.

Their answer is no; deal with it.

Talk about an elephant in the room

Honest accountability to a meaningful standard of conduct.

Nobody wants to talk about it; except me of course.

I think that public servants, within their public service, should be honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct.

It doesn’t help to try to read anything into “honest accountability” and “meaningful standard”. They mean exactly what you think they mean.

I can understand why people who don’t want to be held accountable; don’t want to talk about accountability.

I cannot understand why people who think that public servants should be honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct; don’t want to talk about it.

In less than a month there will be a filing date for candidates for the Albuquerque Public Schools Board of Education. After that date it will no longer be possible to be a candidate. If the issues are not discussed before the filing date, then the issues cannot compel someone to become a candidate based on the issues. A healthy election depends on everyone knowing the truth while there is still time to do something about it.

I want to make honest accountability to a meaningful standard of conduct an issue in the school board election.

I want the terms of public in-servitude to be an issue in the board election.

Despite the fact that I am a candidate, I cannot compel a discussion of relevant issues.

There are those who do not want to discuss these issues. Their personal interests are at stake. No one will argue that honest accountability would not be good for students, and teachers, and parents, and the community. Nor will they argue that any public interest is being served by their refusal to be held honestly accountable for their conduct.

Nor will they argue.

There is only one defense of an indefensible position, it must be hidden; it must be kept secret.

Why are the Albuquerque Journal and Tribune helping to prevent the meaningful involvement of stakeholders?

You tell me. I could suggest a lot of cynical possibilities. The point is I can’t think of a single ethical possibility. Not one. The Journal and Trib are up to their eyeballs in a cover up of an ethics scandal in the leadership of the APS. So is most of the rest of the local media.

If there isn’t a scandal, why won’t someone say “There is no ethics scandal in the Leadership of the Albuquerque Public Schools.”?

No APS leader has said it. Pete Domenici won’t say it. Nor Marty Chavez, nor any member of the City Council, nor of the Chamber of Commerce, nor the Character Counts Leadership Council, nor the teachers union, nor an editor of the Journal or Tribune, nor a news director of KOAT, KOB, or KRQE.

Nobody will stand up and say that there isn’t a scandal; because it would be a lie. No one wants to be the one to tell this lie on the record. Nobody will tell the truth. All that’s left is to stonewall; which is precisely what they are doing. They have no choice but to pretend that there’s not an elephant in the room.

The APS senior administration, the board, Modrall, and the Media do not want to talk about this. I can understand why.

Those who want to end corruption and incompetence in public service; apparently don’t want to talk about it either. That; I don’t understand.

There’s an elephant in public service. Talk about it.

They say there’s no stopping an idea whose time has come.

I offer an idea whose time has come.

As a fundamental term of their in-servitude; Public Servants will hold themselves honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct.

Whether or not this is an idea whose time has come will be manifest in the sacrifice that people are willing to make to defend the principle.

If no one wants to do anything; then the idea’s time is not come.

There’s only one way to find out.

There is a small group of people, seven board members and one superintendent, who run the seventeenth largest school district in the country.

They are refusing to hold themselves honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct. Their position is indefensible; their only hope is to keep it hidden.

A few hundred people can make a difference.

All we have to do to win is to spread the word widely enough to motivate a few hundred people to stand up at a board meeting or email a reporter.

Everybody has their own agenda. I submit that my agenda moves your agenda. What legitimate agenda is not advanced by public service honestly accountability to a meaningful standard of conduct?

Honest accountability anywhere is honest accountability everywhere. It just needs to get started somewhere. There will be no better circumstance, no better time, and no better place to draw a line in the sand and defend it.

A precedent must be set. This is the place to set it. It’s time to kick the ball on to the field.

Where ever you live, you are a stakeholder. There is an opportunity to make a real difference, and all you have to do is help to spread the word.

All we need is people.

Soon.

Secret board election

Three school board seats are up for grabs in February.

One of the editors told me that they would start paying attention to candidates after filing day. Filing day is I believe December 19th.

A great disservice is done by waiting until after filing day. What it means is that political discourse will not take place before filing day. Perhaps when stakeholders find out that Leonard DeLayo, Miguel Acosta, and Robert Lucero are among board members who refuse to hold themselves honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct; someone might be motivated to run against them; somebody who is willing to hold themself honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct.

And if the APS Leadership, Modrall, the Journal and the Tribune; don't want to talk about this now; what makes you think they will talk about it ever? The longer they wait the worse it looks. And the more it needs to stay secret.

Maybe this will be the first stealth election. Talk about voter fraud.

Open letter to every elected public servant in Albuquerque.

Are you willing to be held honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct?

If you are, visit my blog and post your name.

In God we trust; everyone else will be asked for proof.

Who's paying the lawyers?

If a public servant breaks the law while abusing her power, should the public pay for the attorney who saves her from accountability for that abuse?

If so, is it still OK if the money goes to her husband’s law firm? It is a large amount of money; an amount so indefensible that it must be kept secret; even in response to a public records request.

May the public expect that their taxes be spent in a manner that supports the public interest?

If public assets are spent to advance a personal agenda at the expense of the public interest; the law has been broken. Hasn’t it?

Which brings us back the fact that these people cannot be held accountable to any meaningful standard of conduct. They cannot be held accountable even to the lowest standard of acceptable conduct; the law.

Tax payers fund cover up of ethics scandal

The New Mexico Public Education Department may be accumulating fines of up to $300 per day. They have failed to surrender public records by the deadline set by the law.

According to the law, the public agency responsible for the failure to surrender the records will pay the fine out of agency funds. Those funds are tax funds. Likely they are the very dollars that taxpayers contributed in order to provide the best education for their children.

As are the funds enriching the lawyers of Modrall. Public money is being spent to cover up the APS ethics scandal as well.

Taxpayers are paying for protection for public servants who will not hold themselves honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct.

That’s wrong, right?

If I am missing something here; tell me. Please.

The terms of public service

I am not the person to list or defend them all. I submit two.

The first and most fundamental term is; public servants must hold themselves honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct.

Flowing from the first; public servants must answer legitimate questions about their public service.

The members of the Albuquerque Public Schools are public servants. Whatever else, whoever else they are; they are public servants.

They have no choice but to answer the question; or resign.

Paula Maes, Robert Lucero, Miguel Acosta, Berna Facio, Mary Lee Martin, Gordon Rowe, Leonard DeLayo, and Elizabeth Everitt;

As public servants, as stewards of the public trust and treasure, and as role models for 98,000 of our sons and daughters;
Will you hold yourself honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct?

Any answer except yes; is no.

Stakeholders have dues. At the very least your dues include standing up for what you believe in. You are at a fork in the road; you can do something or you can do nothing.

You can email the Journal and Tribune and tell them that you have a right to the truth far enough in advance of the filing deadline to make a difference.

You can copy this appeal and post it where other people will read it. You can ask them to read it.

You can post it on your blog.

You could go to the next board meeting and be counted among stakeholders demanding an answer to the question.

Or you could do nothing.

If I am missing something here; tell me. Please.

APS Superintendent Everitt apparently enjoys the support of the Educator Ethics Bureau

Within the New Mexico Public Education Department lies the Educator Ethics Bureau.

If you file a complaint alleging ethical misconduct by an educator, they will investigate the complaint and assign consequences. They have the authority to revoke educational licensure.

All of the APS Administrators who refuse to hold themselves honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct; do so in violation of any justifiable code of ethics. If for no other reason, they fall short of the standards of the Code of Ethics for the Education Profession. The standard requires that they teach ethics by personal example. People who choose not be held accountable to a standard cannot also maintain that they are modeling accountability to a standard.

Almost two years ago, a complaint regarding this ethical misconduct was filed with the Educator Ethics Bureau against APS Superintendent Elizabeth Everitt.

I called recently to check on the progress. I was told that because the case was still open, I am denied any information about the complaint.

I found it a little hard to believe that it would take almost two years to investigate a simple case. Also I doubted that just because they claimed to be investigating, that they could claim any exception to public records law. I filed a request for public records with the NMPED. I asked for my records, any record that substantiates their allegation that they enjoy exception to the law, and a copy of their “Rules”. It is ironic that you have to file a public records request in order to see the "Rules"; but hey, it’s New Mexico.

The deadline for the surrender of the public records has passed.

I don’t know how my complaint was resolved, they won’t show me the rules, and they won’t show me the rule that excepts them from having to show me the findings or the "Rules".

An agency of the state government has failed to comply with the requirements of the New Mexico Inspection of Public Records Act.

There is nothing that I can do about it. Theoretically the attorney general and the district attorney are at my disposal in the prosecution of my suit to obtain public records. In truth,they actually do have better things to do. They aren’t going to help. I’ve been there.

The AG’s website suggests, “hey, just sue ‘em yourself". So there you are in District Court standing opposite two Modrall lawyers. Imagine a one legged man in an ass kicking contest. It wasn't pretty. You don't get the records, ever. They have lots of time and lots of money. Tax payers give it to them in order to provide the best educational opportunity for their sons and daughters.

Apparently Superintendent Everitt is not accountable even to the law. The state agency that is charged with holding her accountable won’t, and they can’t be held accountable either.

Constituents have a right to know, before the election, before the filing date, that these folks can not be held honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct. That they are not accountable even to the law.

The records will not be surrendered until such time as they no longer represent a problem to eight men and women and their lawyers.

Did I mention that taxpayers are paying for the lawyers?

“…fear of retribution and retaliation is part of APS culture…”

If you know nothing, you know that, that is a sign of organizational ill health.

Culture; “the sum total of ways of living built up by a group of human beings and transmitted from one generation to another”.

I did not choose the word culture, the Council of Great City Schools did.

One generation after another of APS administrators and board members who wield our power, use it to create fear of retribution and retaliation against anyone who questions their decisions or actions.

It’s not the way to run a school district.

Get Out of Jail Free cards for senior administrators and board members

APS senior administrators have a reputation for fiscal incompetence and corruption, and of dodging accountability.

I have paraphrased Governor Richardson’s remarks from before the last bond election.

They refuse to accept accountability to any meaningful standard of conduct.

Yet they are the stewards of hundreds of millions of tax dollars.

When the Council of Great City Schools audited APS after the M&O corruption scandal, they reported that the evaluations of APS administrators were subjective and unrelated to promotion or step placement.

I will paraphrase their point.

People are being promoted into positions of responsibility based on evaluations that were subjective; “They're cool, we'll make them a Director of Something”. And then the Director of Something is given responsibility for spending a bunch of tax dollars. Apparently they are not required to offer any objective proof that that they are in any way qualified to spend money in the best interests of students. They are not enjoined from spending it unethically. They are accountable to no standard of conduct that uses the word ethical.

Is there evidence of incompetence? How much more to you need?

It is the Peter Principle on steroids. No one is accountable for anything. They are not accountable at least in an “honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct” kind of way.

How much (more) money do you want to put into the hands of someone who won’t even look you in the eye when they refuse to hold themselves honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct.

Show me where the axis of APS senior administrators, Board Members and Modrall, have ever fought to hold themselves honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct.

Their record is one of dodging accountability.

It costs money to dodge accountability.

Have tax dollars been misspent?

Did dollars destined for the interests of students, get spent instead in the interests of senior administrators, board members, and their lawyers. Should taxpayers pay for the defense lawyers of those who are accused of deliberately betraying the public interests? If their lawyers were part of it, aren’t taxpayers paying these lawyers to defend themselves against allegations that they have betrayed the public trust as well?

Does unwitting taxpayer support for “education” pay for Get Out of Jail Free cards for administrators and board members?

Public servants cannot be compelled to answer legitimate questions about their public service

What part of that premise is acceptable?

School Board President Paula Maes says board members will not answer questions during public forum. She implied that questions will be answered elsewhere.

In truth, the question, “Will you hold yourself honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct?” will not be answered ever, under any circumstance.

Public servants have an obligation to answer any legitimate question about their public service; in any circumstance. The board is not prohibited from answering the question by any statute, regulation or policy; they choose not to answer the question.

There is only one reason to refuse to answer a question, and that is to avoid accountability for the answer. By refusing to answer the question they are demonstrating that they are not honestly accountable to any meaningful standard of conduct.

Public servants have no obligation to tell the truth in response to a legitimate question about their public service.

The premise is unacceptable, yet we tolerate the behavior.

I wonder if that has anything to do with the fact that public service is awash with corruption and incompetence.

Honest accountability to a meaningful standard of conduct

You can’t just say no. You have to say why.

And it cannot be claimed. It must be established by proof

Journal and Trib play down board elections

On February 6, 2007, voters will make a decision on another school tax issue. A Journal reader would think that was the only election that day. No mention that on the same day, voters will decide who they must trust with that money.

One of the most often heard criticisms about the Leadership of the APS is that they can’t handle money, and that they dodge accountability. These are germane issues. They should be part of the political discourse.

In the last bond issue election, we had public leaders begging us to give the money to kids for classrooms and forget about the issues with the current leadership’s administration of our schools. And I told you then; they were going to ask you to do the same thing again this spring.

No. Not this time.

This time an issue will be made of public servants and the terms of their in-servitude. This time an issue will be made of honest accountability to a meaningful standard of conduct.

The APS axis and the newspapers won't talk about the scandal. It would be bad for the three sitting board members, and it might unfortunately be bad for a worthy tax maintain schools. Why are we always compelled to give money to people we can’t trust, because we have no other choice if we want to maintain our children’s schools?

The Journal and the Tribune should be reporting on the APS ethics scandal. Their refusal is not in the best interests of people who expect them to tell them the truth.

Voters are absolutely dependent upon the media for information to guide their voting. If only for that reason, they obligated to tell the truth.

By refusing to cover the issues, the Journal and Trib are manipulating voter’s choices on taxes; and on those who they must trust to spend them in the interests of education.

If this scandal were honestly covered, there wouldn’t be three board seats on the line, there would be seven.

How can you let someone who refuses to be held honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct, sit on a school board for even one day longer than you absolutely must?