Times' Superintendent Search editorial

The Times had an editorial today about the superintendent search. I have to give the Times credit. They actually said - in print - that they wished it could take place AFTER the School Board elections in the fall. I'm sure they and other power players have been tearing their hair out over this. I'll have to write a lengthier explanation on my take on School Board elections (very different from other elections) but this is a fun piece to read and certainly made me laugh out loud.

On a serious note, I do believe the Board will select one of these people. I'm not sure any of us wouldbe able to find enough wrong to convince the Board otherwise. Are we going to get the person best suited to help us find our way? I don't know. These are the 2 best people out of 39 that the Board selected. So the Times saying "We don't have to settle." isn't going to work. In already stating their case that they wished that the Board would have waited until after the elections, they have played their hand and the Board would never grant them that wish. But the main reason someone will be selected is because it's time and the Board knows it.

Comments

Charlie Mas said…
I love the irony. In 2003, following the collapse of the previous Board's Superintendent search, the Seattle Times editorialized that the then-School Board should "should hire a new firm and launch another search right away, not wait until after the November election."

See Seattle Times editorial of 10/5/2003, So far, not the right fit

The Times supported that Board and Olchefske to the bitter end.

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

Why the Majority of the Board Needs to be Filled with New Faces

Who Is A. J. Crabill (and why should you care)?