Superintendent but what about the Board?

This op-ed is by Joni Balter of the Times.

Comments

Charlie Mas said…
Joni Balter says that the search has been the "Re-election Security Act for four School Board members who need to be replaced"

What would she propose? Mr. Manhas announced in October his intention to leave at the end of his contract. Does Ms Balter think it would have been responsible of the Board to NOT conduct a Superintendent search?

Ms. Balter says that Sally Soriano and Darlene Flynn have not earned re-election - Sally because she "was suing the district over the school-closure plan. In essence, she was suing herself." This is not true and it burns me up that Ms. Balter intentionally misreports this. Sally was not a party to the suit; she provided an affidavit. As for Darlene Flynn being divisive, I'm not sure what Ms. Balter means by that. Whom did Darlene divide? What interests did she further polarize? I will say that Darlene rides the staff very roughly. She shows more impatience with them than would be wise.

Ms Balter says that Directors Stewart and Butler-Wall are "weak-willed". Again, I'm not sure what she means by that. I think it means that they wouldn't do what Ms. Balter wanted them to do.

Ms. Balter says that our schools have sputtered and stalled under this School Board. I would say that the schools have sputtered and stalled under this Superintendent and his CAO Steve Wilson. They had a much greater influence than the Board ever will.

I don't remember Ms Balter editorializing like this when Mr. Manhas was named Superintendent as one of the final acts of another Board. The Times lauded the choice. They didn't cynically call the quickie selection the "Re-Election Security Act" back then.

As for the language of school politics becoming too divisive and driving families away from our schools, I would say that the Times has been at the front of that parade beating the biggest drum they could find.
4/12/07, 12:05 PM
Anonymous said…
Also, given Chow's inability to respond in any kind of a timely fashion to her constituents, I just don't get the Times' support of her. She just seems to hate interacting with us - we're such a drag, I guess.
4/12/07, 3:56 PM
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