Sinking Seattle Public Schools
I know that this blog is titled "Saving Seattle Public Schools", but what if someone had a beef against the District and wanted to make trouble? Think of the SOCKED folks who dragged the District into Court over the school closures claiming, among other things, that the closures violated anti-discrimination laws and the notice provided prior to the closure of Rainier View was inadequate.
SOCKED made use of RCW 28A.645.010 which allows people to have school board or school official decisions, actions, and in-actions reviewed in Superior Court. That's quite a hammer to be swinging around. The law is pretty vague about what sort of things can be appealed. It's also unclear about what remedies the Superior Court can order. The one thing that is for sure is that this law is a gold-plated license to be a royal pain in the ass.
Take, for example, a routine School Board vote, such as the one taken on November 15, 2006 in which the Board voted unanimously to approve the 2006-2007 Building Transformation Plans. With this vote, the Board attested that the school transformation plans were all complete and that they satisfied the requirements of WAC 180.16.220. Well anyone who has read any of the school transformation plans and has also read the WAC knows without a doubt that the school transformation plans don't begin to meet the requirements of the law. So imagine if a person, or persons, either severally or collectively, aggrieved by the vote on November 15, filed an appeal of the vote in superior court within the thirty day deadline. The District would lose and lose hard. The State Board of Education doesn't review the plans; they accept the Board endorsement without independent verification. The superior court, however, would actually check. The net result would be that the District would lose their entitlement to state basic education allocation funds. Seattle Public Schools would be seriously up the creek with no paddle in sight. Every school would have to scramble to draft a new school transformation plan that actually satisfied the legal requirements. No matter how much the District harangued them, I bet it would be MONTHS before some schools complied.
Is it irresponsible of me to point this out to the general public? Or is it irresponsible of the District to ignore the law, irresponsible of the Chief Academic Officer to endorse the School Transformation Plans to the Board without confirming their compliance with the law, and irresponsible of the Board to endorse the plans to the State Board of Education without confirming their compliance with the law? For what it's worth, I did advise the District leadership of this failing and I didn't appeal the vote before December 15. Maybe now that they have been put on notice they won't leave this door open next year.
There are, in fact, dozens of similar events and opportunities in which the District fails to comply with their Policies or the law. Their work is actually pretty sloppy. In addition, the District staff don't really know the District Policies very well. I think they pretty much ignore them. This speaks to the Board's ineffectiveness as a policy-making body, a condition that is directly attributable to their inability to enforce Policy.
If I had access to affordable legal counsel, say a lawyer/parent with an axe to grind, I could keep the District in Court much more than they would care to be there and I would beat them most of the time. Of course, I would forbear if the District would alter some specific decisions that I might name...
I would consider such extortion solely because no other method of negotiation or conversation has proven effective. I don't want to have a contentious relationship with the District. I want a cooperative and collaborative relationship, but they refuse to even talk to the community, let alone cooperate or collaborate. What other tool do I have to bring them to the table?
SOCKED made use of RCW 28A.645.010 which allows people to have school board or school official decisions, actions, and in-actions reviewed in Superior Court. That's quite a hammer to be swinging around. The law is pretty vague about what sort of things can be appealed. It's also unclear about what remedies the Superior Court can order. The one thing that is for sure is that this law is a gold-plated license to be a royal pain in the ass.
Take, for example, a routine School Board vote, such as the one taken on November 15, 2006 in which the Board voted unanimously to approve the 2006-2007 Building Transformation Plans. With this vote, the Board attested that the school transformation plans were all complete and that they satisfied the requirements of WAC 180.16.220. Well anyone who has read any of the school transformation plans and has also read the WAC knows without a doubt that the school transformation plans don't begin to meet the requirements of the law. So imagine if a person, or persons, either severally or collectively, aggrieved by the vote on November 15, filed an appeal of the vote in superior court within the thirty day deadline. The District would lose and lose hard. The State Board of Education doesn't review the plans; they accept the Board endorsement without independent verification. The superior court, however, would actually check. The net result would be that the District would lose their entitlement to state basic education allocation funds. Seattle Public Schools would be seriously up the creek with no paddle in sight. Every school would have to scramble to draft a new school transformation plan that actually satisfied the legal requirements. No matter how much the District harangued them, I bet it would be MONTHS before some schools complied.
Is it irresponsible of me to point this out to the general public? Or is it irresponsible of the District to ignore the law, irresponsible of the Chief Academic Officer to endorse the School Transformation Plans to the Board without confirming their compliance with the law, and irresponsible of the Board to endorse the plans to the State Board of Education without confirming their compliance with the law? For what it's worth, I did advise the District leadership of this failing and I didn't appeal the vote before December 15. Maybe now that they have been put on notice they won't leave this door open next year.
There are, in fact, dozens of similar events and opportunities in which the District fails to comply with their Policies or the law. Their work is actually pretty sloppy. In addition, the District staff don't really know the District Policies very well. I think they pretty much ignore them. This speaks to the Board's ineffectiveness as a policy-making body, a condition that is directly attributable to their inability to enforce Policy.
If I had access to affordable legal counsel, say a lawyer/parent with an axe to grind, I could keep the District in Court much more than they would care to be there and I would beat them most of the time. Of course, I would forbear if the District would alter some specific decisions that I might name...
I would consider such extortion solely because no other method of negotiation or conversation has proven effective. I don't want to have a contentious relationship with the District. I want a cooperative and collaborative relationship, but they refuse to even talk to the community, let alone cooperate or collaborate. What other tool do I have to bring them to the table?
Comments
The Board may have broad discretionary powers, but they are not allowed to violate the law.
I wouldn't propose hauling them into court for every single freaking decision. I'm only interested in airtight cases such as the one I described. Even being selective like that, it is a target-rich environment.
How about this, if you dislike how things are being handled RUN for the School Board, don't waste tax payer money on the Courts hearing (and the District defending) cases that are filed simply because you want people to listen to you.
I DID run for school board in 2001. I was endorsed by the Weekly, the P-I, and the Stranger but finished third in a three-way primary.
My next opportunity to run will come in 2009 and, depending on my work situation, I may choose to run again.
Why is it that a citizen has to be on the School Board to be heard?
Really? Name one lawsuit under this statute in the last five years in which the District did not win.
Frankie
What is the polite and inoffensive way to try to hold someone accountable for telling lies?
As for the nutso factor, what is the sane reaction?
As for what would be a sane reaction to school policies you don't agree with, I'd pick the one tha matters most to you, express your views clearly, concisely (and politely), and then organize like-minded people to join your advocacy on your issue. But if you write incessant letters, they won't listen to you about any of it. Imagine if Manhas wrote to you two or three times a week about how to be a better parent.
I did quietly (and politely) bring these discrepancies to people's attention - they ignored them.
When I spoke directly with Mr. Manhas about a set of promises he made in a letter to thousands of families, his response to me was "Well, you know, I didn't write that letter." That is a direct quote. When asked, he did confirm that he had read and signed the letter. But then he denied any responsibility for implementing the promised actions saying that it was other people's work. When asked, he denied any responsibility to manage the people that he claimed had the job of implementing his promises, and denied any responsibility to confirm that his promises were fulfilled.
So, following that exchange, what's the next step on the polite and inoffensive track to effective advocacy? Or, at that point, would you conclude that this person is a total write-off?
I am, for the most part, civil, courteous, and constructive. If you have seen me give testimony at Board meetings you will see that. In fact, the idea that my behavior is the problem didn't arise until fairly late in this thread.
First came legal questions, then came the suggestion that I run for the Board, then, finally, came the suggestion that my demeanor is diminishing my effectiveness.
Let me assure you, that's not the problem. I wrote frequently to the Superintendent about that one issue (the letter full of unfulfilled promises), and that was three years ago. Writing less frequently is no more effective.
The problem is that people have an extraordinarily difficult time getting a coherent response out of the District staff or the district leadership about ANYTHING. Everything just goes into a Black Hole.
The problem is that the District staff commonly show bad faith to members of the community. They refuse to collaborate, they refuse to provide timely accurate information, they often refuse to even tell people about their decisions.
The problem is not that people, actual flesh and blood people, have normal healthy emotional reactions to being treated dishonestly and disrespectfully. The problem is the dishonest and disrespectful treatment.
I'm glad that Frankie had such a good experience. That story, however, is extraordinary. Perhaps that is the model to follow: make appointments with each Board member and speak to them one-on-one about your issue.
Thanks for everything you do and your diligence in pointing out the black holes.
I personally hate being sucked up in black holes and I really hate it when people label me as crazy when I ask about black holes. Part of the marginalization of truth-tellers so flagrant today.
The school district has an extended history of ineptitude if not thievery and and most of the school board have been bought in exchange for their pet projects.
I super appreciate your ability to watch it and I learn a lot from your commentaries.
I guess all I can hope is that CPPS and A4E will not successfully place more school board members who can be bought and that the Mayor will be unsuccessful in his efforts to eliminate electeds on the school board. His people are at the core of the problems.
How about that fraud investigation?