Executive Session RE: Complaint and Possible Litigation

The Board has scheduled a meeting in Executive Session (private) for 4:30pm to 5:15pm on Wednesday, December 8 before the regular legislative meeting.

The agenda for the meeting reads:
Executive session to discuss complaints against a public employee and to discuss potential litigation with legal counsel
Does anyone know what this is about?

Comments

Anonymous said…
I wonder if it has to do with Garfield staff. I was at a talk with KSB and there was a lot of discussion about the coaches and Secretary (?) being involved with 'legal'.
Central Parent
12/6/10, 6:06 PM
joanna said…
More specifically the football/athletic staff, right?
12/6/10, 8:05 PM
The Real Arnold said…
Comments 1 & 2: No.

Charlie,

There is a reason it is in executive session; meaning, it is not something that the public has a right to know - yet.

Read the laws on this.
12/6/10, 9:11 PM
Melissa Westbrook said…
Gee Arnold, they are just wondering aloud about a meeting right before a public meeting. I don't think there's a law against thinking outloud.
12/6/10, 9:37 PM
AEIC said…
Charlie,

I bet they are talking about your ethics complaint against the Sup, and any other ethics complaint filed against her, and Mr. Treat's having hired an outside lawyer to defend against (oops, I meant investigate) those complaints. Or hey, maybe he has hired one outside attorney to investigate her, and another to defend her.

Just my thoughts.
12/6/10, 11:12 PM
Charlie Mas said…
Actually, I don't think the purpose of executive session is to maintain secrecy of the topic but to maintain the confidentiality of the details, the strategy, and the opinions of the participants.

So, for example, it would do no harm to hear that there has been a complaint from a worker charging that a manager broke a work safety law while keeping confidential the names of the persons involved, the District defense plan (including the amounts they are willing to settle for), and the opinions of the Board members and the general counsel.
12/7/10, 7:57 AM
The Real Arnold said…
@Charlie - I meant to imply confidentiality, not secrecy.

@Melissa: Gee Melissa,I was just providing my insight. I was not saying that he could not think outloud.
12/7/10, 9:36 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