Don’t make me get physical

…said the Praetorian Guard member.

I was “resisting” the fact that I was being thrown out of the third board meeting in a row for exercising my right speak on the record.

A publicly financed, private police force is being used silence political opposition.

I will stand on the evidence and hold myself accountable to the truth.

to raise a question of privilege

According to my authority, the second hit on the list that popped up to the search;

Privileged motions are motions that are so important that they must be dealt with immediately.

A question of privilege deals with the comfort, convenience, rights or privileges of the assembly or of a member. Usually, the question of privilege is a request; such as, "Mr. Chairman, I rise to a question of privilege of the assembly." Then the Chair: "State your question of privilege." Member: "may we have the blinds pulled to eliminate the glare of the sun?"

Or, “may we have the opportunity to participate meaningfully in decisions that affect us?” Decisions about the exercise of power and resources that are fundamentally ours?

If a member wishes to amend a non-debatable motion and the chair will not recognize him or her, the member can use a parliamentary inquiry to get the floor.

While it is an interruption, it is not a disruption. It does not warrant the removal of a member from the meeting. It especially does not warrant the intervention of a private police force; a praetorian guard.

…a chair's ruling on a question of privilege can be appealed…

Board policy quoted in significant part, emphasis added;

B.10 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AT BOARD MEETINGS

The Board shall provide an opportunity for citizens to be heard regarding their concerns, complaints, or commendations during public forum at each regular meeting of the Board of Education.

B.14 PARLIAMENTARY AUTHORITY

Roberts' Rules of Order, newly revised, will govern the Board of Education, except when state regulations prevail.

Also part of the policy is the part where the privileged class excepts itself from the rules, “Actual procedures will be left to the discretion of the Board president.”

Not on my watch.

There is no ethical justification

…for removing the Public Forum from the Public Record. It serves no public interest. Were there any justification at all; you would have been told something more than “everybody else is doing it”.

We would not accept that excuse from a child; there is no reason to accept it from the senior role models for 98,ooo of our sons and daughters, or from the stewards of the public trust and treasure (a half a billion dollars a year), or from our public servants.

They’re getting away with it because you won’t do anything to stop them. You have to show up to stand up for what you believe in. There is no equivalent gesture. Nothing will do except for you to show up at a board meeting and

just say no.

The school board candidate workshop

I left the workshop disturbed by page 13 in our handout. It had to do with the dos and don’ts of handling “pressure groups” at board meetings.

Under the do’s were; do tell stakeholders that they can not ask questions, and do remind stakeholders that there is a rule that prevents them from asking even legitimate questions.

Under the don’ts were; don’t answer questions, and don’t take questions from stakeholders, even legitimate questions about the manner in which you are exercising the power which they have entrusted to you; power which is fundamentally theirs.

By way of justification; “There just isn’t time at board meetings, to answer questions that require detailed explanations.”

OK, what about a simple question that requires only a yes or a no, like; are you willing to hold yourself honestly accountable to any standard of conduct at all?

The public forum is the only place where that question can be asked on the record.

If the public forum is moved off the record, then the question and the response are moot.

At what point did it become OK for public servants to dictate the terms of their public service?

And for how much longer will that arrangement be tolerated?

There is no ethical justification for removing the public forum from the public record.

They have deliberately and dishonestly edited the public records of public forums in order to hide the truth. They have deliberately deceived stakeholders.

The evidence is incontrovertible. It is a matter of public record.

The right to ask a legitimate question and to expect a good faith response, on the public record, is worth defending.

A just resolution will not be the result of justice; it will come after the fight.

Sacrifice is the currency of commitment.

Polls are open

You can if you want to, cast your vote for a candidate for the APS school board. You can also cast a vote for or against taxes to maintain the schools.

What you can’t do is, cast a fully informed vote on either issue.

Thanks to: KKOB KOB KOAT KRQE Journal Tribune

“Right to carry” permit for school board candidates?

I thought long and hard before posting this. There will be those who will say I made it up. I didn't.

I have been advised three times now, by different people, that because of what I am writing; I should pursue my right to carry a concealed weapon.

Well into the third millennium, deep in the heart of one of the most respected democracies on the planet, a candidate for the school board needs to pack heat?

This is beyond creepy.

The implicit freedom to exercise constitutional rights at a public forum is worth defending.

The right of citizens to hold their public servants accountable, on the record, is threatened.

And with it the very control of the public over power that is fundamentally theirs.

No ethical explanation has been offered; nor will one be. There is none. It is being done by public servants in order to dodge accountability for misconduct and incompetence in their public service.

The privileged class

The greatest thing about being a member of the privileged class is that you can not be made to justify, defend, or even acknowledge your membership.

APS Leaders and the Tribune spread the “truth”

According to the Tribune; the embattled APS Police Chief is also the subject of a previously unreported lawsuit alleging retaliation.

It is not surprising.

Gil Lovato is the chief of a private police force that is neither certified nor accredited by anyone other than the leadership of the APS. The police force is in every sense a praetorian guard.

During the decades that Gil Lovato ran the guard, the administration of the APS acquired what the Council of Great City Schools described as a “...culture of retribution and retaliation…”

In the article, APS, Modrall, and the Tribune pointed out that Lovato has not previously been the subject of a “lawsuit”. They pointed it out twice.

An effort has been made to create an impression; the false impression that Lovato has no similar previous complaints. It will be useful in his “legal” defense. The leadership of the APS, Modrall, and the Tribune are painting a sympathetic picture of Gil Lovato.

As the leaders of the APS, the lawyers of Modrall, and the editors of the Tribune well know; Gil Lovato is the subject of previous similar allegations of criminal misconduct and retaliation, allegations not yet resolved.

That part of the truth didn’t make it into the article, the portrait of Lovato, or I would bet, into the “full” disclosure made to the plaintiff’s lawyer.

UPDATE This morning the Journal joined the APS/Lovato defense team by repeating the "no lawsuit" deceit.

They need to keep the lid on until after the board elections. If they do, they win.

Bloggers,

I would sure feel a whole lot better if I wasn’t the only one writing about this.

It is easy to check. Ask APS’ Rigo Chavez if Gil Lovato is the subject of unresolved allegations of criminal misconduct and retaliation; yes or no.

If the answer is yes, then you have something to write about.

There is no acceptable explanation

Without public input or permission, the leadership of the APS lowered the standard of conduct to which it is accountable. They now hold students accountable to a higher standard of conduct than their own. They have repeatedly refused to hold themselves honestly accountable to any standard of conduct at all.

Public servants have changed the terms of public service, against the public interest.

In whose interests is the truth still being suppressed?

The Pillar of Respect

…one of the six Pillars of Character Counts.

In the APS, students are required to model and promote the Pillar of Respect. They are required to respect the right of stakeholders to participate in decisions that affect them. They are required to demonstrate that respect by illuminating the truth, by being candid, forthright, and honest.

The leadership of the APS is not accountable to that same standard of conduct.

By their own deliberate choice.

“…the vindictive tone” of my posts

A reader has pointed out that my posts have a vindictive tone; so I have given the issue some thought.

I concede the point.

But it would be wrong if readers concluded that I am running for the board only to be vindicated.

I have two agendas, my personal agenda and my agenda for public service.

My agenda for service on the school board is;

1. absolute transparency in the exercise of power and the spending of resources
2. meaningful site based management
3. restoring of the authority of adults over students in schools
4. the commitment of power and resources to problem solving and to no other purpose.
5. to establish for the APS, a reputation of character and competence worthy of taxpayer and community support
6. to defend the board against a Mayoral takeover
7. to enable and support innovative teaching, and
8. to establish for public servants, while in their public service in the APS; honest accountability to a meaningful standard of conduct

If I can succeed in passing that agenda, I believe that public interests will be well served.

If I can succeed in passing that agenda, my personal interests will be served as well.

I don’t see the problem.

Robert Lucero owes his constituents an explanation

I’m sure they would like to know why he spent hundreds of thousands of their tax dollars renovating a board room for him self, while Susie Rayos Marmon ES is falling apart.

Unfortunately he is not in the habit of responding constituent’s questions by telling the truth. On Thursday night he will vote to permanently remove the public forum from the public record.

In order to hide his refusal to hold himself honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct, for the thirteenth time.

The buck stops where?

According to the Tribune, the leadership of the APS is spending over $600,000 on an unnecessary and unnecessarily luxurious board room. It turns out that the number is low; really low. So low that you will never find out how low it really is.

If you don’t believe it, ask APS' Rigo Chavez or Joeseph Escobedo for a candid, forthright, and truthful response. Ask them how much money was really spent in that room. Note that when the too low number was published, the leadership of the APS did not offer to correct the mistake. They were comfortable with the community believing in a lower number. It is dishonest.

While you’re asking for the truth, ask who is responsible for spending money on an unnecessary board room; while Susie Rayos Marmon Elementary School is “falling apart”. The school is an all portable classroom campus. Assuming $30,000 per portable classroom, instead of an indefensible investment in a new boardroom, there would be 20 new classrooms. Who is responsible for that decision? Ask, you will be stonewalled.

So how do voters hold an unidentified administrator or board member accountable for spending a still secret amount of money against the public interest?

Elect someone who will hold themself, and the leadership of the APS, honestly accountable to a meaningful standard of conduct.

How is it that in order to get elected

you never have to stand eye ball to eye ball with voters and answer any question they want to ask?

Why is there no active APS Citizen Advisory Council?

...and who is accountable?

What if every voter wanted to hear every candidate answer the question on the record;

are you willing to be held honestly accountable in your public service, for your conduct and your competence?

And the media and the newspapers steadfastly refused to ask the question of any candidate.

What do you do?

Am I really the only one who wants to know?

I don’t hear anyone else asking candidates for public service if in their public service; they are willing be honestly accountable to some meaningful standard of conduct.

Trust is a poor substitute for absolute transparency.

What’s wrong with the question?

Am I asking too much?

“Get Out of Jail Free” cards for APS Leaders

…paid for by taxpayers.

During my interview with the editors from the Tribune, I mentioned that APS Leaders by and through their Modrall lawyers bought immunity from accountability for felony criminal misconduct. I was asked; don’t people do that all the time?

Imagine that a custodian spreads the wrong kind of deicer on a sidewalk and a student is hurt. The district has some liability for the injury. And the district can properly exchange pubic money for immunity from further claims for damage.

Imagine that a senior administrator commits a felony and in order to dodge criminal accountability; the district offers someone public money not to tell the police about the felony.

There is a difference.

Where do you hide an elephant during an election?

...behind a stone wall.