Looks like Sharon Peaslee has made a little headway on Peter Maier's lead but if not by Monday, then it's probably a lost cause.
On the other hand, Marty McLaren has retained her lead and, by reading the Times this morning, not a minute too late. The Times' has this great story about how the district never intended for principals to have broad oversight over student newspapers. (Say what? Did they read their own policy? Yes - they - did.) And the reasoning? More laugh ensues.
Seattle Public Schools officials now say they never intended to give principals broad oversight of students' newspapers, saying a controversial proposal resulted from the "crazy" time frame they are working under as they revamp hundreds of district policies this year.
The board is pushing district staff to work at an accelerated pace because the current policies are out of date and not universally followed, School Board President Steve Sundquist said.
"It's in everyone's interest that we move quickly," he said. "Time is of the essence."
Oh come on, Steve. That's BS. And you know why? If this was so important, then why wasn't this started earlier? (Well, it was by the previous Board but Steve doesn't like to give that group any credit.)
But like Sherry Carr (who, at a Board Committee meeting around this issue said to Holly Ferguson, "What's the rush?"), Kay Smith-Blum stated:
"This is our core work," board member Kay Smith-Blum said at an executive-committee meeting on Wednesday. "And I just feel like we're rushing through our core work."
Also, here's part of the explanation for this error (as well as a previous one around the issue of military recruiters in the schools which somehow got overlooked in these revisions):
The interim superintendent signed off on the policy proposals last month. Then School Board members met with district administrators to review them. But the meeting ended before the officials made it to the freedom-of-expression policy, and they decided to push ahead anyway because of time constraints.
The proposal also passed through the board's curriculum-and-instruction committee, whose members did not spend much time on it, chairman Harium Martin-Morris said.
Charlie has often pointed out what a lacking job Director Martin-Morris does as C&I chair and this just adds to the pile. The committee members didn't "spend much time on it?" Isn't that what the committee work is for? And, since this shouldn't be a rush job, then take it slowly if you have other work to do on the committee.
Smith-Blum gave a perfectly great suggestion:
She said she would ask district staff for clearer analysis of the impact of policy proposals and would request the board slow down the entire process and schedule more work sessions to review proposals.
What's on your mind?