They make no record of meetings they call "executive sessions"; no videotape, not even an audio record is made.
That is convenient if they choose to break the law during one of their in-secret meetings.
The board conducted an in-secret executive session during the Audit Committee Meeting on August 25, 2010.
After the meeting, School Board enforcer Marty Esquivel created an unlawful restraining order, link, he likes to call a "banning letter". That is when he is inclined to admit its existence. He is not above telling bald-faced lies about it, depending on the context, link.
He can call it whatever he wants, it is still specifically and expressly prohibited in School Board Policy, link, highlighted in significant part;
Board of Education members shall have authority only when acting as a Board of Education in a regular, special, committee or emergency meeting. The Board of Education shall not be bound in any way by any statement or action on the part of any individual Board of Education member. No Board of Education member shall speak for or represent the entire Board of Education unless so authorized by the majority of the Board of Education.
Board Member David Robbins once averred; the unlawful restraining order, was in fact authorized by the board.
The only way he could be telling the truth, is if he and the rest of the board discussed the banning, agreed to it, and then authorized it as a board.
According to the Open Meetings Act, their discussion and action on any issue without having that issue on an agenda of a legal meeting would be illegal. Even their in-secret meetings have to follow the Open Meetings Act. Before they adjourn into "executive session" they are required to disclose with "reasonable specificity" what they intend to discuss. After the session, they are required, by roll call vote, to affirm that they discussed and acted upon nothing else.
The "banning letter" does not appear on any agenda for any meeting. Any authorization of the unlawful order by the board could only have occurred in violation of the law; during an executive session, or during no meeting at all.
They would each, have had to individually lie about having had the discussion and made the decision, when the roll call vote was taken after the session.
Either that, or Esquivel acted unilaterally and Robbins lied about the board's having authorized it.
It shouldn't go unmentioned that there was no outrageous conduct in the first place. The record of the two meetings that Esquivel cites in the unlawful restraining order were both recorded. The November 4, 2009 meeting can be viewed on APS website, link.
The second meeting, the August 25, 2010 Audit Committee meeting was recorded only in audio, though we have video, and Esquivel is seen hear, making one of his own.
You have to wonder, if he has a video tape of illegal conduct, why has he filed no complaint with law enforcement.
I would be happy to have anyone view and listen to these recordings, and then point to the place where I did anything illegal or even unethical. I would be happy to have any of the thousands of students to whom I taught Character Counts!, view and listen. I want the record illuminated.
By what stretch of reason, is this story not newsworthy?
Someone behaving so "outrageously" to be permanently deprived of their Constitutionally protected human rights to speak freely and petition their government, is newsworthy.
Consider that Geraldine Amato, who never behaved so outrageously as to be banned from public meetings, was newsworthy, the Journal even tipped their hat to her, link.
Journal Managing Editor Kent Walz and APS School Board enforcer Marty Esquivel are cronies.
That would seem to explain Walz' refusal to investigate and report upon a school board president permanently denying any citizen the free exercise of First Amendment rights.
It would also seem to explain Walz refusal investigate and report upon Esquivel's complicity in the effort to cover up the cover up of felony criminal misconduct by APS senior administrators.
photos Mark Bralley
Esquivel "videographer" ched macquigg
cc Kent Walz upon posting
Esquivel and Robbins have indicated they would rather not be emailed by me about anything, ever. So be it.
No comments:
Post a Comment