Imagine a six year old kid who wants to be a firefighter.

Imagine that the student learns to read
by reading about firefighting.

And s/he learns math, by doing firefighting math,
and learns about science,
by studying the science of firefighting.

All the while practicing learning.
All the while developing learning skills and resources.

And, the very next day,
when that dream has been replaced by another,

s/he will learn how to learn, by learning about policing,
or about nursing, or about flying, or about
any other goal that a child's mind can imagine.

And when the kid gets to middle school
and dreams about being "a marine biologist",

(for some reason, all middle schoolers want to be marine biologists)

they pretty much know how to learn on their own.

They pretty much know how to learn about anything at all
on the web and on their own.


Imagine teachers with enough time to devote to students
in need of individual attention.

And enough time to help to grow children into adults
who are decent human beings;

good citizens, caring and fair, respectful and responsible,
and trustworthy.

And when they graduate high school, they are as prepared
as they can be, to learn and do anything at all.

Compare that to the likelihood of a student in an NCLB
bureaucracy high school, graduating,
prepared to learn and do anything,

... at all.

Journal stays on top of APS

In the Journal this morning; everything you need to know
to participate meaningfully in the great cheese sandwich debate.
link

Nothing, of course, that you need to know to participate
meaningfully in the school board elections.

Nothing for example, on the Moss Adams audit report.

The Moss Adams audit found,
and now the leadership of the APS is finally admitting;

"... for a few years, (during which the APS Finance
Division spent BILLIONS of tax dollars) the district
wasn’t always following acceptable accounting practices."

During those past few years,
APS Deputy Superintendent Tom Savage oversaw the
APS Finance Division.

He also had oversight over the APS Police Department
whose problems were/are so bad, that the leadership of the
APS is stilling hiding the evidence (the Access Investigations
Report).

Upon his retirement, APS Board Members Paula Maes and
Mary Lee Martin were falling over themselves gushing about
what a wonderful job Tom Savage had done.

The buck for both problems stopped on the desk of then
APS Superintendent Beth Everitt.

Upon her retirement, Paula Maes and Mary Lee Martin
were falling over themselves gushing about what a wonderful
job that Everitt had done as APS Superintendent.




Now Maes and Martin are running for reelection to the school board. The implied promise, that they will be looking after taxpayer interests; a task at which, both are demonstrable failures.

Voters won't take that into account when they cast their ballots,
because the Journal won't report upon the Moss Adams audit,
nor upon any other problems in the APS for which Maes and
Martin bear oversight responsibility.


They will be re-elected, against the public interests,
because the Journal won't live up to its obligations
to fully inform voters in preparation for an election.

Journal readers though, will be kept fully informed on the
cheese sandwich debate.


Shame on the Journal.



photos Mark Bralley

Robert Lucero would like every one to know;

the Moss Adams auditors (supposedly)
found no criminal misconduct; no blatant corruption.

I would argue that it IS corrupt
to witness a century of incompetence;

• policies inadequate to protect the public interests,
• accountability inadequate to enforce the policies they had, and
• records so inaccurate and incomplete, that criminal misconduct could not be proven, no matter how egregious,
  

and do nothing about it.

APS not telling the truth.

In response to a demand for a candid, forthright and honest
accounting of the Moss Adams Audit, the leadership of the
APS posted this; link.

They offer the following statement;

The APS Finance Department, under the leadership of
Chief Financial Officer Gina Hickman,
recognizes that for a few years the district wasn’t always
following acceptable accounting practices."
(emphasis added)

The truth is that the District has never followed
acceptable accounting procedures.

The proof of the allegation is simple logic.

If there ever were acceptable accounting practices, where are
they now? Where is the record that they ever existed?

If there ever were acceptable accounting practices,
the leadership of the APS could point to the record and say,
Here is the evidence that proper accounting procedures
were once being followed.

And then they would be able to point to the place where
the proper accounting procedures were replaced with
improper accounting procedures.

They can't of course, because it is simply stupid to believe that
proper accounting procedures would allow for the dissolution of
themselves, to be replaced by

• inadequate policies,
• inadequate accountability, and
• inadequate record keeping.

You be the judge;

which is a candid, forthright, and honest portrayal of the facts;

• implying that there were only "a few years" of problems, or
  
• admitting that the problems have been there all along?

Their candid, forthright, and honest response,
was not so candid, forthright, and honest, after all.

They have made a deliberate effort to mislead stakeholders.

They have been dishonest according to the standard of
conduct that they enforce upon students.


And yet, their lawyers will argue;
their clients haven't been caught "telling a lie".

OK, so what am I to do with this?

I have it on good authority that;

A student brought a knife to Jimmy Carter Middle School.

He had brought the knife to school with the intention of using it.

He was caught, APSPD wanted to arrest him and press charges,
and then administration intervened.

His parents made a stink, and now he is back at school.

Many staff and teachers at the school are outraged.


Is all or any of this, true?

I guess the point is that
there is no reason to believe that, it is not true.

Teachers and staffs are outraged across the district.
The data would show that, if the data were collected.

The last audit by the Council of the Great City Schools
revealed that principals routinely falsified crime statistics
in order to make their schools look good.

The cleanest way to falsify data, is to not create it;
no paper trail;
what kid? what knife?


There is a document called

the Student Behavior Handbook.

Technically, it is an extension of school board policy.

There is a part of that document called

Minimum Mandatory Consequences.

It represents the district's promise that students
who willfully misbehave, will suffer some mandatory consequence.

The promise is diametric to the truth, which is that
principals take advantage of language in the Handbook,
that teachers call the "weasel clause".

In effect, the clause says that
administrators can do anything that they want to do,
and then justify it by saying that they used their "best judgment".

An administrator's best judgment is not subject to question
or review.

The leadership of the APS doesn't want to talk about student
discipline.

They don't want to talk about student discipline because;

• it is a powerful influence on success in schools,
• it is in the toilet, and
• it is an administrative responsibility.

So they just won't talk about it.

And teachers
who see their sacrifices made pointless in out of control schools,
find other lines of work.

The teacher shortage is not because the colleges of education
are not turning out enough graduates.

It is because half of new teachers quit teaching in the first few
years, and half of the remaining teachers, quit in the next.

Student discipline is not on the table for honest and open
public discussion.

It should be.

So what am I supposed to do about it?

The system has no place where the issue of student discipline
can be addressed, and no place to complain about the fact that
there is no place to address the issue.

Submitted as only one of many subjects about which,

the leadership of the APS will not tell the truth.

Superintendent Winston Brooks, tell us the truth!

Moss Adams, Certified Public Accountants
has submitted their Independent Auditor's Report.

I think that there are issues; past, present, and future.

I think questions about "criminal misconduct" were answered with odd non verbal communication among those who answered. It felt to me like the answers;

"... depend upon what the meaning of the word 'is' is".

I think APS Chief Financial Officer, Gina Hickman materially misled the committee, and apparently the federal government, by representing any efficacy at all of the APS SilentWhistle whistle blower program.

If at any place in the audit, I can find some evidence that
Moss Adams has signed off on APS' SilentWhistle,
then they have been materially misled as well.

I think that there is a lot of inconvenient truth about the Moss Adams Audit in APS' bucket of truth.


It is not my obligation to try to pry out the truth.



It is Winston Brooks' obligation
to tell the truth;
candidly, forthrightly, and honestly.


And it is not completely unreasonable
to ask to see his signature above
a line that reads;

and I promise to tell the truth,
the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth.

(so help me God)

photos Mark Bralley




Update;
The leadership of the APS has responded; link
Nothing in the response, to the allegation that
APS' SilentWhistle whistle blower hotline is a scam.

A complaint made against APS' Director of Internal Audit,
would go to SilentWhistle,
who would then return it to APS' Director of Internal Audit.

Who can then close the complaint, and refuse to identify who closed the complaint, and even refuse to answer a legitimate question about who her supervisor is.

APS Audit Committee Meeting Thursday, January 22, 2009

The agenda read;

Presentation/Discussion/Action of Financial Statements
and the External Audit for Year Ending June 30, 2007

In short, I am concerned about some of the things I heard,
not the least of which is a $36M "accounting error" brought
about in no small part by a still inadequate accounting system.

An external auditor, whose name I do not know, asked with
incredulity;

You're still using Excel Spreadsheets?

I will post again, on the audit itself, but first I would like
to offer an apology to Board Member Marty Esquivel.

Mr. Esquivel had to point out to me, because I had missed
the significance,




that this particular meeting was the first Audit Committee Meeting including the presentation of an audit, that was open to the public.

This was the first time the public saw the sausage before it was
packaged for retail.

I remember now, the discussion about whether or not
the audit committee meetings would ever be open to the
public. I remember Robert Lucero arguing vehemently
to keep them secret, and now I remember Marty Esquivel
refusing to take no for an answer.

This open audit committee meeting, warts and all, would not
have happened except for Marty Esquivel's efforts.

Mr. Esquivel is also working on legislative changes in the
Governmental Conduct Act, which would bring school boards
like APS', under the purview of the Act. Oddly, there is on
the books, an exception to that law, for school boards.

Marty Esquivel and I have gone round and round on the idea
of administrative role modeling of the Student Standard of
Conduct. We will continue to go round and round until I am
satisfied that there are administrative role models of the
Student Standard of Conduct.

In the meantime, I will try my best, to not let that interfere with
my giving credit, where credit is due.

Yesterday was Marty Esquivel Day in the Martin DeLayo
room.


Kudos as well,
to Board Member Delores Griego, who

when the bean counters were arguing that a $36M accounting
error was relatively small potatoes, considering the overall
amount of capital assets,


argued on behalf of stakeholders, that;

$36,000,000.00 error
was not inconsequential at all.

Perhaps there is some hope for stakeholder interests before
the school board, after all.



photos Mark Bralley

Are School Board Members Role Models?

Of course they are.

Are they accountable as role models?

Clearly not. Not if we can't get them to even admit that they are
role models.

Yet they are running for the school board, with some success.


Apparently, no one cares.

So when we give the little kid a Character Counts! tee-shirt,
that on its front and back reads;

Stand up for what you believe in,
even if you are standing alone.

basically,
they are.



They deserve better.

They deserve an adult role model behind them
offering encouragement.

And an adult role model beside them
sharing the burden.

And an adult role model in front of them
leading by their example.

Refusal to take an oath or affirmation

According to NM State Statutes, anyone who refuses to take
oath or affirmation is guilty of a petty misdemeanor.

In theory, when the APS Board of Education refuses
to take the following oath, they are breaking the law.

As a senior role model of the student standard of conduct,
a standard of conduct which requires telling the truth,

I promise to tell the truth
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth,
about the public interests and about my public service
(so help me God)

The only reason they aren't breaking the law, by refusing,
is that I don't have "standing" to insist that they do.

After all, I am only a citizen, a tax payer, and a stakeholder.

"Pay to play" in the APS?

The Journal has reported on campaign contributions in the
APS School Board Elections. link
Oddly, I cannot find the story in my home editio of the Journal;
I only stumbled across it on their website.

There are some out of state contributions, which seem just a
little weird.

There is a contribution from Brad Winter's wife, whose
law firm does business with the APS.

There is a contribution from Doug Baker, whose law firm
Modrall, does millions of dollars worth of business with the
APS, in part for litigating exception to the law for APS
administrators and board members.

There are contributions from sitting APS administrators.
APS doesn't have a searchable data base. where I can confirm
my suspicions. I could be wrong on this one, but
I think that I recognize their names.


And of course nobody will answer questions about anything,
it's just not the way they roll.


According to the Journal,

District 3 candidate Jeffrey Rich said
he was refusing to disclose his fund raising because
he wants to "show how corrupt the election process is at APS."
He said he instead supports mandatory disclosure,
with legal penalties attached.

The Journal saw no need to elaborate on the issue,
or upon any other issue in the school board races,
less than two weeks from election day, and
more than two weeks into early voting.

More Journal reporting on anything but ...

Journal education reporter Andrea Schoellkopf has reported
on campaign contributions in the APS school board races. link

Don't get me wrong; this is great information to know.
But as an adjunct, not instead of some solid reporting on
the real issues in the race.

Four candidates have said that they will step up as role models
of the student standard of conduct.
And their opponents are stonewalling the question.

Four candidates have said that they will tell the truth about
public interests and public resources in the APS.
And their opponents are stonewalling the question.

Four candidates have said that they are in favor of an immediate
impartial standards and accountability audit of the leadership
of the APS.
And their opponents are stonewalling the question.

Four candidates are willing to stand on the record and swear
to tell the truth about the public interests in the public schools;
subject to, and only to, exception according to the law.

Four candidates are willing to look into the eyes of stakeholders,
including 87,000 of this community's sons and daughters,
raise their right hand and say;

I promise to tell the truth.

And their opponents are stonewalling the question.

And their opponents are stonewalling all of these questions.


And all Journal readers have to go on,
when they elect the people that they must trust with control
over their power, and with the administration of their treasure,

is relatively meaningless list of campaign contributions.


Instead of reporting on solid and important issues,
voters are given instead, campaign finance reports.

Good information for voters to have certainly, but


not instead of the truth.

This can't be!

Rio Grande High School and Ernie Pyle Middle School
are to be "reconstituted".

Because they have "failed" to make adequate yearly progress
on the NCLB testing, the schools are subject to "reconstitution".

In its extreme, the entire teaching staff is given their walking papers, and if they want to continue to work at the school, they must reapply for their jobs.

APS Superintendent Winston Brooks, according to an article
in the Journal, link, defends wholesale staff changes at
"failing" schools, saying it, "... has made a difference" across
the country.

Andrea Schoellkopf, Journal education reporter, writes;

"Brooks said one idea is that employees
who don't want to stay at the school or don't agree with
its mission be guaranteed three priority interviews at
other schools.

But Bernstein said the union doesn't want those teachers
in a classroom anywhere."

If RGHS and EPMS teachers don't buy into a plan that
they have had no part in creating, and don't agree with,

they shouldn't have a teaching job anywhere?

you have got to be kidding!


Update; turns out I was right at "this can't be".
The Journal admits an error, and I published a correction.

The line comes from a response from Bernstein in a response
to what the union would have done, with bad teachers.

APS to fight for police force during legislature

KOB TV reports that APS is trying to get the legislature to
make the APS Police Department a "stand alone" police force.
link

There are upsides; not the least of which is state and federal
grants that are made to actual police departments, and
immediate access to the NCIC Criminal Data Base.

The part I don't understand;

the felony criminal abuse of the BCSO NCIC involving APS
senior administrators,

• Tom Savage's fiancee was the victim of an illegal criminal background search,
• as was at least one whistle blower whose background was searched illegally and in retaliation for blowing the whistle,
• and I think, five other victims of illegal searches involving APSPD and the BCSO,

is still being hidden by APS, from the District Attorney's Office.


How does that wash, exactly,
in the decision to upgrade the APSPD to a stand alone police force?

The answer is; it doesn't.

Peanut Butter Off Menus at APS

Five column inches in the Journal this morning link
on APS' apparently unnecessary pulling of peanut butter from
school menus.

The Journal reports;

APS Director of Communications, Rigo Chavez said;

that the only thing APS now serves with peanut butter is a Smuckers Uncrustable peanut butter and jelly pocket sandwich, which, according to a company news release, is not part of the national recall.
"They decided to pull everything for now," he said.

The Journal reports nothing, still,

on anything to do with the school board elections,
and which would be useful to voters
in making this very important decision.

The Albuquerque Journal; keeping it relevant.

Journal endorses school board candidates

Wouldn't that be a hoot?

They have endorsed candidates before. In fact,
they usually endorse school board candidates.

The problem is that this year,
they are pretending that there isn't an election.
They are running the second stealth election in as many
board elections. link

So it would be difficult to endorse a candidate
in an election that isn't happening.

The election is half over, and
they still haven't given voters anything that would help them
to vote for the right person.

Why, you ask, does it make any difference?

Why does in make any difference if the leadership of the APS
starts telling the truth, as opposed to not telling lies?

Every significant problem in the APS
has roots in the still secret, inconvenient truth.

You can't solve problems and
keep them secret at the same time.


If hiding problems is more important than solving them
they will never be solved at all.

It doesn't seem fair.

The people who passed the law that requires everyone else
to promise to tell the truth before they testify,

never saw the need to pass a law requiring the same of them,

even when they are asked legitimate questions,
about the public interest, or about their public service.

When our character is being tested,

we call it

a moment of truth.

How ironic.

Public Forum available to aps school board candidates.

During the APS School Board meeting Wednesday evening,
there will be an opportunity for stakeholders to petition their
government.
The opportunity comes by way of the scheduled public forum.

Anyone can stand up and ask the sitting board to;

1)promise to tell the truth, and then
2)to sit still and respond to some legitimate questions,
candidly, forthrightly and honestly;

according to the standard of conduct that
they enforce upon students.

Questions like;

Why are you not honestly accountable as role models
of the Student Standard of Conduct,
and in particular, why are you not accountable
to any standard of conduct at all,
that requires you to tell the truth?

Honesty manifest in truth telling, is the foundation
of the Pillar of Trustworthiness.


How can anyone be worthy of trust,
who can not promise to tell the truth?

Revisiting the "bucket of truth" analogy.

Imagine a bucket. And in that bucket, the truth about the APS;
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

The truth in the bucket, if it "belongs" to anyone at all,
belongs to stakeholders.

Except.

The law allows some of the truth to remain secret from public knowledge. A portion of the whole truth falls under honest interpretation of the law.

Another portion is reasonably removed according to any
legitimate higher standard of conduct than the law,
for any good and ethical reason.

The truth left in the bucket belongs to stakeholders.

Stakeholders own all of the truth
except in accord with any good and ethical reason.

Our share of the truth can be sorted into two buckets;
the convenient truth, and the inconvenient truth.

The leadership of the APS spends hundreds of thousands of tax dollars every year, to "communicate" the convenient truth to stakeholders; to deliberately mislead and deceive them.

They spend an equal amount of tax dollars, on litigation
to keep the inconvenient truth in the bucket.

We try to teach students to care about their good character.
We tell them that it is important in their lives, and in the lives
of those around them.

We teach them what it means to tell the truth, and we tell them
why "telling the truth" is different from, and better than,
"not telling a lie".

We try very hard to get students to come to believe that
if the bucket of truth were in their hands,
their immediate obligation is to spill the entire bucket out
for everyone to see.

We teach them: if they do not empty the bucket entirely,
they make that choice, at the forfeit of their good character.

So when I ask administrators, school board members, and
school board member candidates,
if they are going to "tell the truth" I mean;

• Are you going to spill the whole bucket?
• Are you going to tell all of the truth except, for a good and ethical exception?

Now how do I explain all of that,
in about five seconds
before some moderator tells me to get to my question,

which is;

Do you promise to tell the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
about the public interests, and about your public service

(so help you God)

Someone on the A P S Board of Education
is going to be the first to stand up, raise their right hand,
look into the eyes of stakeholders,

and answer, yes.


All of the rest, will be among the last.



I pity the fool, who is dead last.

It's a toss up, in my humble opinion,
between Paula Maes and Robert Lucero.