City Presentation to Board on Memorial Stadium

Looking at the Board calendar, I see that someone in the City is coming to give a presentation to the Board on Memorial Stadium at 4 p.m on Wednesday (before the Board meeting at 6). I'm assuming this is just a general "here's what we have, here's what we could do, we need input".

The Seattle Times also had a front page article on the entire Seattle Center on Sunday complete with a "draw your own Seattle Center" blueprint. Both the Center House (which houses the Center School) and Memorial Stadium are key issues for SPS. While I have heard plenty of talk around Memorial Stadium, I haven't heard a peep about what might happen to Center School. I've asked Board Directors in the past and they just shrug so it makes me wonder if the District is pushing to keep Center School there or what.

Comments

dan dempsey said…
Originally the board was to have a work session on the high school math adoption at this time. That is now delayed for 2 weeks. Looks like another example of what Ms. Bass refers to as the Administrations usual tactic of "Oh my the train has already left the station too late to change anything now."

Very interesting how the District in the case of Denny/Sealth decided on a course of action with zero public input, produced a bunch of drawings etc. Then it was too late to change anything because too much was invested.

Perhaps input needs to come before investment? but only if the SPS cared to take public input into account.

Clearly the SPS is interested in only creating the illusion of hearing the public.

I liked Mr Gillmore's next to last Power Point slide from Toronto. It mentioned making the public feel heard. It said nothing about actually listening to the public.

Another mystery solved.

Perhaps the new school board can get this under control after they finish approving all the past administrative deception.
3/12/08, 8:13 AM
Anonymous said…
Does anyone know what was presented? Did it have anything to do with the Center School (or building a comprehensive HS at Seattle Center)?
3/12/08, 8:03 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