Personality and management style

We have two assistant principals at my school. Their personalities are very different. One has a sense of humor, and sees the humor and opportunity in every situation, while the other sees only crisis everywhere, and treats everyone and everything accordingly. Management styles are also very different. With the new statewide evaluation system, there is lots of confusion. There are unanswered questions that go unanswered because no one seems to have an answer. Basically, it feels as if this new process is being made up as we go. Naturally, teachers are not sure what is actually expected of us. And, sadly, it seems the interpretation of our new professional standards is controlled by the personality of the evaluator. One of them treats it as a partnership in a learning process, and actually talks with the teachers during or after observations. The other treats it as a checklist to be marked off, so if it's not immediately evident you get demerits.

For instance, one of the standards is about Instructional Planning:

The teacher plans using state and local school district curricula and standards, effective strategies, resources, and data to address the differentiated needs of all students.

An 'exemplary' teacher

The teacher continually seeks and uses multiple data and real world resources to plan differentiated instruction to meet the individual student needs and interests in order to promote student accountability and engagement. (Teachers rated as Exemplary continually seek ways to serve as role models or teacher leaders.)

A 'proficient' teacher

The teacher consistently plans using state and local school district curricula and standards, effective strategies, resources, and data to address the differentiated needs of all students.

Apparently, the only evidence worthy of consideration on this point is to be found in the written lesson plan. At least, that's how my evaluator sees it. In spite of materials at the ready (did they fall from the sky?), equipment prepared ahead of time (by the equipment fairy, perhaps?), my written lesson plan is inadequate and therefore, I was marked "Not Evident" on this standard.
Let me point out that we are using a new lesson plan format which we are also not sure about, we've been giving no help in using it, and it takes me hours to complete the document. This is a sore point for me, as I feel those hours would be MUCH better utilized in actual preparation for great instruction. I don't have precise dates on my lesson plan, and today's prompt did not appear on the plan. Apparently, once the plan is made, we are not allowed to make any adjustments on the fly, to meet learner needs. BTW, when I had a killer lesson with stations, as described in the lesson plan, and invited this evaluator, there was no response. Put technology in the kids' hands, in the form of digital cameras (purchased, at my expense, from the thrift store) to document our work? No points. It doesn't fit into one of the check boxes. Have them apply what they've learned in a writing task in the content area? No points. Must've forgotten to write it in the lesson plan. Real world scenario and data for student use posted in the room? Not even acknowledged. I'm not aware of any research to support this particular planning form as an effective instructional tool.
By the way, the standard on "Instructional Strategies" received no comments beyond observing student use of the cameras. Just checkboxes. And I would submit that those were inaccurate, anyway, being that Providing Directions/Instructions and Student Writing were not marked, though clearly displayed on the board. Oh, well, I guess this is too complex for poor little me.
In my college program, they taught us that the lesson plan is for the teacher's use and convenience. This turns it upside down and makes it a tool for the aid and  convenience of the evaluator.
Frankly, if someone wants me to leave, they should tell me. I'd be glad to go. But, if this evaluator destroys me on TKES, the chances of getting out are slim.