School Board Meeting Tonight

On the "Introduction Items" section of the agenda of the Seattle School Board meeting tonight is Resolution 2006/07-13, Authorization for a Reduction in Force. Apparently, the district is anticipating the need to lay off "certificated staff." Does anyone know whether the plan is to lay off teachers? or other certificated staff? or both?

The "Public Testimony" section of the agenda is dominated by people testifying about military recruiters. (14 out of 20 slots). Maggie Metcalfe is going to testify about public access to the superintendent search process, Chris Jackins is going to testify about Garfield construction costs, and the three remaining slots are about the New School, student assignment, and math.

The meeting is from 6 pm to 8 pm at the Stanford Center. However, as Melissa Westbrook mentioned earlier, a public hearing on the use of I-728 funds is scheduled prior to this meeting, from 5:00 pm to 5:15 pm. I'm not able to attend either meeting tonight, but would appreciate hearing from those who do.

Comments

Brita said…
I believe that the timing of our budget process vis a vis the state legislature means that every spring, we vote on a 'reduction in force' of teachers and other certificated staff. When we get our final allocation from the state, we can hire a number of them back.

This synchronization problem makes planning difficult for the district and for the teachers whose immediate future is in limbo.

I don't know what the solution is, nor which lawmakers may have been working on this issue.
4/18/07, 12:03 PM
Anonymous said…
Can someone remind me how we can watch the board meeting online? I am really curious to hear about what the speaker has to say who signed up about student assignments. I saw that she is from NE Seattle.

Thanks
4/18/07, 8:12 PM
Beth Bakeman said…
The online link doesn't get added until after the School Board meeting, sometimes as quickly as the next day, sometimes not for a week or so.

When it's available, you can find it at: Seattle Channel

To watch it live, you have to have cable. I believe it's on Channel 26.
4/18/07, 8:42 PM
Anonymous said…
Thanks Beth,

I just watched the speaker I mentioned and she expressed mine and many others who live East of Roosevelt's feelings exactly.
4/19/07, 9:12 PM
Anonymous said…
One thing to consider about Roosevelt. It is a victim of its own success. The NE hasn't suddenly sprouted new kids. I'd be willing to bet that there are private school kids whose parents now want to try public school and what school is that? Roosevelt.

I have heard this argument before about how certain neighborhoods have "always' gone to Eckstein, Roosevelt, etc. Times change and we now have more kids than space. Eckstein was forced to take on more than 90 extra kids several years back and has trouble keeping up. It cannot happen any further at Roosevelt (and I know the administration is feeling the pressure to take on more kids).

I saw a scattermap from Metro about kids eligible for Metro service who attend Roosevelt. I was honestly surprised at how many kids came from SE Seattle, Magnolia and Queen Anne. (There are very few from West Seattle.) I think some of that, especially in the SE, is likely the last vestiages of the use of the racial tiebreaker which hasn't been used in years. Probably the siblings of the original students who used the tiebreaker to come to Roosevelt are in the group that attends from the SE. But in 2-3 years, given Roosevelt's popularity and the apparent numbers of high school kids in the NE, those numbers from below the ship canal will change greatly.

It might help the district's credibility to tell people if they see an influx of new students (not previously in the district) coming to Roosevelt to try to help explain the problem.
4/19/07, 10:20 PM
Anonymous said…
"I have heard this argument before about how certain neighborhoods have "always' gone to Eckstein, Roosevelt, etc."

I know a lot of families in Laurelhurst who grew up in Laurelhurst and went to Eckstein/Roosevelt, and now want their kids do have the same experience. I also know for a fact that realtors advertise Roosevelt as the school - here is an example:
http://www.windermere.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=Listing.ListingDetail&ListingID=17242380

I understand the situation this year and that you can't overcrowd Roosevelt, but I really can imagine the outrage I would feel if I purchased a home in a neighborhood based on the schools and then my child got assigned to a school in South Seattle which was not even in their top 3 choices. Then, I find that I can't get that child in private school (since I assumed we'd get in a NE school, and private schools are all booked up).

I think the arguement was very good at the school board meeting - a lot of people who live closer to Roosevelt and Nathan Hale also live closer to other high schools. I think it is completely a reasonable arguement to have each student have priority to the high school geographically closest to their home (after siblings), and then have distance be the next tie breaker. Then students in neighborhoods like Laurelhust and Magnolia won't be sent tto schools so far away. What happens when Garfield's rennovation is complete? Does that mean Laurelhurst kids won't get in there either?
4/20/07, 9:47 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

The speaker list is up for the Board meeting tomorrow; not as packed as I thought with just four people on the waitlist. The majority of the speakers are speaking on high school boundaries (with several wanting to talk about Ballard High). There are only three of us speaking about the Green Dot resolution asking the City to not grant the zoning departures that Green Dot has requested.  It's me, long-time watchdog, Chris Jackins, and the head of the Washington State Charter Schools Association, Patrick D'Amelio.  (I knew Mr. D'Amelio when he headed the Alliance for Education and Big Brothers and Big Sisters; he's a stand-up guy.)
Read more

Breaking It Down: Where the District Might Close Schools

Update 2: an absolutely fabulous interactive map made by parent Beth Day (@thebethocracy on Twitter - she covers Board meetings and is fun to read).   end of update    Update 1: Mea culpa, I did indeed get Decatur and Thornton Creek mixed up. Thanks to all for the correction. end of update   I suspect some who read this post will be irate. Why do this? Because the district seems very hellbent on this effort with no oversight skid marks from the Board.    To clearly state - I do not believe that closing 20 schools is a good idea. I think they hit on 20 because they thought it might bring in the most savings. But the jury is still out on the savings because the district has not shown its work nor its data. I suspect closing schools and THEN leasing/renting them is the big plan but that means the district really has to keep the buildings up.   But this district, with its happy talk about "well-resourced schools" is NOT acknowledging the pain and yes, grief, that is to come fro
Read more

MEETING CANCELED - Hey Kids, A Meeting with Three(!) Seattle Schools Board Directors

 Update 2: So I have seen a message from President Liza Rankin on why she, Director Evan Briggs, and Director Michelle Sarju backed out of this meeting.  In a nutshell: - She says there was no organization to the meeting which is just not true. They had a moderator lined up and naturally the board members could have set parameters for what to discuss, length of meeting, etc. All that was fleshed out. - She also claimed that if the meeting was PTA sponsored, they needed to have liability insurance to use the school space. Hello? PTAs use school space all the time and know they have to have this insurance.  - She seems to be worried about the Open Public Meetings law. Look, if she has a meeting in a school building on a non-personnel topic, it should be an open meeting. It appears that Rankin is trying, over and over, to narrow the window of access that parents have to Board members. She even says in her message - "...with decisions made in public." Hmmm - She also says that th
Read more