Debate the issues facing Seattle Public Schools, share your opinions, read the latest news. Organize and work for high quality public schools that educate all students to become passionate, lifelong learners.
Dueling Posts on the SLOG
Get link
Facebook
X
Pinterest
Email
Other Apps
The Stranger invited both sides of the Supplemental School Levy to write posts for their news blog, SLOG.
Sadly, the Stranger Slog comments section isn't working because of a strain on the server due to a contest they are having. But you can certainly comment here.
Sharon Rodgers, who wrote for Schools First, is someone I know. She and I have a cordial, respectful relationship and I certainly don't take anything she said personally. But I think I will use her wording in reply.
I am appalled by people who are enablers for our district to continue to fail financially. I am appalled by people who, levy after levy, promise to hold the district and the Board to be accountable and yet, nothing changes. Parents are large group and could be counted on if Schools First and/or the Seattle Council PTSA asked them to rise to the occasion and put pressure on the district to do better.
They never have.
They encourage us to write letters to the Board and talk to the Board and even more hilariously, talk to Dr. G-J. Sure, that'll work.
I am appalled that anyone could read that audit and not feel sickened. And then go out and say, trust the district.
I am appalled that anyone could look the other way or pretend that it's just a few naysayers saying no. It's not and Schools First knows it. Sorry, when you get the Seattle Times saying no and the solid citizens of the League of Women Voters expressing deep dissatisfaction with the district and, instead of backing this levy as they did for the ones in Feb, say they are taking no position, then it's not just a few people.
It's interesting because I was having a conversation with a state legislator who told me that he was surprised about how much the district was making of the cuts because the Legislature tried very hard to stay away from education and made cuts much deeper in other areas. It's like the district is tone-deaf to the rest of the state having to make do with less.
And those cuts hitting "bone"? Not when you don't freeze the travel budget or you have extra money for a lavish party or hire Broad residents for upper management jobs. Sorry, we're really not there yet.
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.)
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
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
Comments
Sharon Rodgers, who wrote for Schools First, is someone I know. She and I have a cordial, respectful relationship and I certainly don't take anything she said personally. But I think I will use her wording in reply.
I am appalled by people who are enablers for our district to continue to fail financially. I am appalled by people who, levy after levy, promise to hold the district and the Board to be accountable and yet, nothing changes. Parents are large group and could be counted on if Schools First and/or the Seattle Council PTSA asked them to rise to the occasion and put pressure on the district to do better.
They never have.
They encourage us to write letters to the Board and talk to the Board and even more hilariously, talk to Dr. G-J. Sure, that'll work.
I am appalled that anyone could read that audit and not feel sickened. And then go out and say, trust the district.
I am appalled that anyone could look the other way or pretend that it's just a few naysayers saying no. It's not and Schools First knows it. Sorry, when you get the Seattle Times saying no and the solid citizens of the League of Women Voters expressing deep dissatisfaction with the district and, instead of backing this levy as they did for the ones in Feb, say they are taking no position, then it's not just a few people.
It's interesting because I was having a conversation with a state legislator who told me that he was surprised about how much the district was making of the cuts because the Legislature tried very hard to stay away from education and made cuts much deeper in other areas. It's like the district is tone-deaf to the rest of the state having to make do with less.
And those cuts hitting "bone"? Not when you don't freeze the travel budget or you have extra money for a lavish party or hire Broad residents for upper management jobs. Sorry, we're really not there yet.
Vote NO!
Helen Schinske