I asked the Board about their stand on I-1240 and received this reply from President DeBell:
A Resolution opposing I-1240 is on next week's agenda for introduction and action. It was recommended unanimously by the Executive Committee to the full Board at yesterday's meeting and will be posted tomorrow.
This follows the Renton School Board's rejection of I-1240 as well.
So here how it is lining up against I-1240:Community groups, many legislators and other elected officials, the Washington State PTA, the Washington State School Directors Association, the Association of School Administrators, the principals' association, numerous labor groups, and, I predict, a huge number of specific school boards.
On the other side:Billionaires, LEV, Stand, DFER, many editorial boards and all the people who believe that by voting for charters they stick it to the teachers union. (I say the latter because I have tracked the editorials and two things are apparent. Most of the editorial boards did NOT read the initiative because they get basic details wrong. Two, the comments from those editorials reflect a deep anger at the teachers union. Oddly, I never hear this anger at the police or firefighters unions.)
There might be more on the Yes side except that they have NO endorsement listing at their site. None. Almost as if they are embarrassed at how few groups support them and/or the actual people who do.
Also, from the Stranger Slog, a weigh-in from a constitutional scholar at UW who thinks I-1240 violates two parts of the Constitution. One is fairly obvious as there is a term "common school" in the Constitutionn which makes clear schools have to have local oversight. The other is the business of selling/leasing school property for less than it is worth.
I would point out that there are still other legal, though non-Constitutional, issues.
One, I believe that I-1240 may violate the one topic rule for initiatives because of the conversion charter.
Two, I believe that requiring the entire Charter Commission to be of one mind on an issue is probably illegal in some manner. It's hard to understand how anyone on the Commission could be objective if they practically have to swear allegiance to charter schools.
Still another District update, this from KUOW.
It appears the only money the district will get back from the mispent/lost funds from the Silas Potter scandal is insurance money of $280,000 which is the amount Silas & Company funneled to themselves.That is because that is the only amount that is a direct "loss" - the other amount is unclear and so considered "misspent." Hilariously, Ron English, District counsel, says perhaps they could recover some through "restitution." Good luck with that.