What Did They Know and When Did They Know It?
Those over 45 will recognize the question. We have a number of people to ask about: the superintendent, the COO, Director of Facilities, the Board, and the Seattle Times.
The answers are pretty sad. It turns out that just about all of them knew a whole lot and they knew it a long time ago.
The Superintendent knew about the program, she knew what it cost, and she knew what it did. She is on the record praising it, which means that she reviewed it. She gave Mr. Potter an endorsement for his spin-off non-profit. She was fully informed. It is very likely that she will claim to have known nothing about it. It won't be credible, but even if it were, that would even more damning. The program was identified as a problem in the 2009 budget. Didn't she claim that she follows up closely on these audit exceptions? Is she telling us that she didn't know where the District was spending a million dollars a year? In a capital budget that didn't have money for needed repairs in schools, how could there be a million dollars a year for this project? Isn't prioritizing the spending her job? She needs to go. Everyone accountable - including her. Her immediate resignation would be good; her immediate dismissal would be better.
The COO knew even more about the program. The District claims that 80% of the spending is on teaching and learning, so $1 million a year is a bigger part of the money he's supposed to be watching and prioritizing. He thought it was more important to spend a million on this than on school building repairs. In addition, the problems in the program were specifically mentioned in the 2009 audit. He was supposed to have been watching it closely. He claimed that he was watching it closely on more than one occassion (following the 2009 audit and the 2010 audit). He absolutely needs to go. The internal auditor, in his resignation letter to Mr. Kennedy, wrote "I believe that you are using these claims to hide the fact that you deceived the school board by not letting them know of the early warnings that I have provided." Mr. Nderu claimed that he warned top administrators and the school board that they weren't providing sufficient oversight and that the district was inappropriately using money from its capital levies for a program designed to help small businesses compete for government contracts. Everyone accountable - especially Mr. Kennedy. He should not be allowed the option to resign; he needs to be fired so it appears that way on his work history.
The Board knew about the program and they knew what it cost. Don't they have a responsibility to set spending priorities? The Board has ultimate responsibility around audits. After this program was cited in the 2009 audit the Board should have been following up on it closely, but they don't follow up on anything. They had repeated warnings from the state auditor and their own internal auditor. The four Board members up for election in the fall should all simply choose not to run. That would be the most gracious exit and the one that we should allow them. If they refuse to go quietly, however, their repeated failures to demand any kind of accountability at all, their repeated failure to follow up on any audit exceptions, their poor choices in budget priorities, and their repeated failure to represent the interests of the community should be the centerpiece of their opponents' campaigns.
We have cause to believe that the Seattle Times knew about this at least as early as July when the 2010 audit was released. We know for certain that they knew about it in December when the internal auditor quit/got fired. Melissa was writing about this mess all through the summer, fall and winter and we know that Times staff reads this blog. They knew. When you read the Times story about the internal auditor's resignation it is so full of passive voice and so empty of names that it is an obvious effort to bury the facts. This is from a story dated December 7, 2010:
The answers are pretty sad. It turns out that just about all of them knew a whole lot and they knew it a long time ago.
The Superintendent knew about the program, she knew what it cost, and she knew what it did. She is on the record praising it, which means that she reviewed it. She gave Mr. Potter an endorsement for his spin-off non-profit. She was fully informed. It is very likely that she will claim to have known nothing about it. It won't be credible, but even if it were, that would even more damning. The program was identified as a problem in the 2009 budget. Didn't she claim that she follows up closely on these audit exceptions? Is she telling us that she didn't know where the District was spending a million dollars a year? In a capital budget that didn't have money for needed repairs in schools, how could there be a million dollars a year for this project? Isn't prioritizing the spending her job? She needs to go. Everyone accountable - including her. Her immediate resignation would be good; her immediate dismissal would be better.
The COO knew even more about the program. The District claims that 80% of the spending is on teaching and learning, so $1 million a year is a bigger part of the money he's supposed to be watching and prioritizing. He thought it was more important to spend a million on this than on school building repairs. In addition, the problems in the program were specifically mentioned in the 2009 audit. He was supposed to have been watching it closely. He claimed that he was watching it closely on more than one occassion (following the 2009 audit and the 2010 audit). He absolutely needs to go. The internal auditor, in his resignation letter to Mr. Kennedy, wrote "I believe that you are using these claims to hide the fact that you deceived the school board by not letting them know of the early warnings that I have provided." Mr. Nderu claimed that he warned top administrators and the school board that they weren't providing sufficient oversight and that the district was inappropriately using money from its capital levies for a program designed to help small businesses compete for government contracts. Everyone accountable - especially Mr. Kennedy. He should not be allowed the option to resign; he needs to be fired so it appears that way on his work history.
The Board knew about the program and they knew what it cost. Don't they have a responsibility to set spending priorities? The Board has ultimate responsibility around audits. After this program was cited in the 2009 audit the Board should have been following up on it closely, but they don't follow up on anything. They had repeated warnings from the state auditor and their own internal auditor. The four Board members up for election in the fall should all simply choose not to run. That would be the most gracious exit and the one that we should allow them. If they refuse to go quietly, however, their repeated failures to demand any kind of accountability at all, their repeated failure to follow up on any audit exceptions, their poor choices in budget priorities, and their repeated failure to represent the interests of the community should be the centerpiece of their opponents' campaigns.
We have cause to believe that the Seattle Times knew about this at least as early as July when the 2010 audit was released. We know for certain that they knew about it in December when the internal auditor quit/got fired. Melissa was writing about this mess all through the summer, fall and winter and we know that Times staff reads this blog. They knew. When you read the Times story about the internal auditor's resignation it is so full of passive voice and so empty of names that it is an obvious effort to bury the facts. This is from a story dated December 7, 2010:
In letters to Nderu, which Nderu shared with The Times, the district alleges, among other things, that he told a district employee to deposit a $35,000 check into the account of a nonprofit organization, rather than the district's own accounts, where it should have gone. The nonprofit was a new group formed to provide training services that the district once offered.That's how we can be certain that Linda Shaw knew about this in December. Yet Silas Potter's name never appeared in the paper. The Times didn't write about the program or the mismanagement represented by these failures of oversight - even after the problems were identified by the state auditor. The Times sat on the story.
Comments
How this program could have been allowed to go on for so long, with such little oversight, while sucking so much money away from our schools, is beyond me. And all of this during a time of financial crisis in SPS, where teachers are being rif'd, buildings are in disrepair, parents are paying over $200 a month for kindergarten, high school college counselors have been done away with, and transportation has been cut back to a bare minimum. Just shocking.
You are right, Brita, this is a very sad and sorry situation.
It's entirely possible that Potter was slipping them some SPS money for his own personal gain down the line, but it would not be unreasonable to investigate whether enriching these community leaders was meant to further the district's larger agenda.
I notice some of the touched organizations were part of the Our Schools Coalition, for instance.
Even if this wasn't some larger conspiracy to win support from these organizations for SPS initiatives, the fact that the district and the Alliance wanted their favor would at the very least make them reluctant to daylight everything that was going on.
It's difficult to say whether that had similar play for the Seattle Times or not, but it is a thread worth following when trying to unravel they whys and wherefores of this very bizarre story.
WV: prewar
Then it morphed out of control.
My sources tell me that people DID know about the whistleblower program but knew it would come back and hurt them. Some DID say something and paid for it. I believe Noel Treat has the best of intentions but he's new and probably would not be able to protect anyone.
Charlie states it pretty well; it is almost impossible for people up the foodchain to say they didn't know or couldn't have known. All you have to do is look at the pricetag and wonder what is going on.
I'm sure the Board is waiting for their own investigation to be finished and they have some real soul-searching to do.
I agree that the connections between Potter, some of the contractors, the people asked/hired (I'm still unclear: did presenters get paid to teach these classes?), people paid to testify before the legislature...there are people amonst these who also are involved in various and sundry local "community" coalitions, et al.
When Our Schools popped up to throw its "survey" at the media (then became moribund: its website hasn't been updated in a year or so), one notes that it was comprised almost entitely of minority organizations and a few business organizations.
What are the connections between individuals who benefited (materially or in other ways) and the "reform" movement?
One is the use of minority groups as "community": When one needs to argue that "reform" must happen, it often seems directed at poor non-whites (don't see a lot of agitation for "reform" in predominantly white, poor rural areas). These minority groups, in turn, sometimes lend their name/votes/whatever to the "reform" cause. So what sort of deal-making, career-enhancing, quid pro quo is going on that connects "reform" to this scandal we see today?
I'd like to see a chart like...Sue? did for "Reform" that includes all the individuals in the city that benefit from community/gov't/district connections, and how those individuals might fit into the "reform" chart.
Well I hope you succeed in pushing her out because the way things are shifting politically in Seattle and the nation, we may actually get a real reformer in at the SPS, one who'd stop these very kinds of wasteful 'diversity' programs.
Yes, Brita thank you for the post on the intent.
Ron English, on the other hand, can be held accountable, but his role is too ambiguous for me to write about.
Mr. English probably did absolutely nothing illegal. He probably did what he was directed to do. But he's been around the district a long time and he has eyes.
I did ring up the Department of Commerce media department. I left a message with a young woman who told me it was unlikely they would have a comment to make but would pass the message on.
As liberal as I am, I'm outraged that the district was spending money on something so far afield from it's mission of educating CHILDREN! I am all for supporting minority businesses, but why didn't anyone stop and ask is this the role of a school district?
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3923020/SilasPotter/SutorReport001.pdf
He, however, was one who received the email dated Jan. 12, 2009 from the Sutor Group outlining many of the problems with the program and then later the same year is listed as an instructor in the Small Business Training September 2009-December2009.
You are not asserting that Don Kennedy did anything illegal, just that he should have known and done something about it. Is that not also true for Ron English.
He is a lawyer and was very close to Fred Stephens in facilities and all land use and facility decisions. Who would understand better than he?
1. negotiating the new SEA contract
2. when no confidence vote happened still endorsed MGJ "awarding" her a contract extension
3. promoting and pushing the Levy in November.
4. projecting next school year's $36 mil shortfall...
Sheesh...(only clean word I can think of).
Also, there's NO WAY Enfield knew NOTHING!
this region is really really small, economically - if you're not 1 of the 8 figure ++ early birds of Microsoft or Amazon, if you're not a weyerhauser or boeing pooh-bah, if you didn't get into Starbucks when it 5 stores outside Pike Place Market ... if you're not 1 of the anointed or 1 of the lucky, AND, you're ambitious, you have to move to L.A. or D.C. or Chicago or N.Y.C. or Boston or San Fransisco -
so who is left?
Don't rock the boaters. Enjoy the ride! Keep your head down cuz when the scythe of re-org comes zooming through the cubes, let the big mouth 2 aisles over get it! The big mouth tries to get things done! The big mouth asks questions with yes or no answers! The big mouth is watching the clock and the calendar!
Compared to what people steal in other parts of the country, our thieving and our public "accountability" looks like keystone kops cleaning up Mayberry, RFD.
Sadly, the most likely outcome is some underpaid underlings will go under the bus for this Alfred E Newman Affair.
Sound And Fury
Brita, as much as legally possible, I hope you'll update on what you find. Thanks for your post as well.
Citizen: Interesting point on ties between community groups and Reform. My take: the achievement gap or opportunity gap has morphed into an opportunity for fraud.
Case in point: TFA can't prove that their unqualified corps are solving the achievement gap, but they bank on it, to the point of implying that anyone who questions them is a racist.
A con is a con, and Silas Potter, whatever his prior history or intentions, became a con. It's possible that the Seattle Way made his scam possible. Most of us tend not to question anyone who claims to operate for fairness and equity.
It's been commented on the blog that people within SPS knew what he was up to, but it was political death to say anything. The Times reported that Stephens took action to limit what he could do as far as writing contracts but Potter continued to run his scam. Until it blew up.
Did he operate as long as he did thanks to HR polioy, MGJ's lack of oversight, or cronyism? If last year's no-confidence vote is an indication, the majority of SPS's people don't trust MGJ and her adinistration. Any investigation will automatically be tainted unless it's conducted by a team outisde SPS and Seattle "culture." That includes all the boosters, from the Times to James Bible.
Reform Inc. looks like a con, at least to me, because they have little proof of success over the institutions they seek to replace.
A con artist uses whatever social engineering opportunites are available to make it work. Seattle is easy pickings. The district is big, it has money and a long commitment to equity, and yet, SPS is still called out for inequity. It would seem that honest leadership rather than political leaderhip would extinguish this enduring criticism.
Given her performance, MGJ is a con. She's had the full support of the usual community players in her achivements except she hasn't really achieved what she takes credit for doing. If you want to go there, into the mud of racial inequity, real and imagined, she actually hurt minority children when the forced half the Lowell cohort to Thurgood Marshall. The kids that needed funding lost their funding. On paper, the school suddenly became high-achieving. What's she done to West Seattle is another thread and another discussion, but the facts are there.
We live in a world where the truth can be right in front of us, and we keep dithering about things that either don't exist, or situations that have easy solutions.
Achievement, for all children, can be solved with attention and time. Reformers don't want to pay for people. Look at Wisconsin. People make the difference, but snap, they have to be paid, so isn't it easier to demonize people and call for replacements?
In this ridiculous climate of calling out injustice where it doesn't exist, while ignoring injusyice and abuse that is allowed to festere right in front of us, cons like Silas Potter will flourish. And so will MGJ, Broad, everyone who drums up PR with the right people to run the same old scam, rinse and repeat.
Kparent, if you are as appalled as the rest of us, considering signing this petition pushing for MGJ's ouster.
http://www.petitiononline.com/NC_MGJ/petition.html
(cut and paste in browser)
When I note that Mr Kelly of the Urban League was paid to go lobby in Oly by SBDP, and that the Urban League is also one of the members of the Our Schools Coalition, I wonder. I'm sure there are other relational connections to be made betwixt and between players. Like it's said, it's all about relationship (though in schools they mean forming a meaningful one with students; with the edu-business and edu-reformers, it's more about relationship as networking.
Speaking of OSC, they have a new addition to their website, after a year or so. In January, evidently, they post this OUR SCHOOLS COALITION
A Case Study: The Impact of Organized Community Involvement in
Teacher Contract Negotiations in Seattle Public Schools, 2010
Fascinating read. Who knew Steve Sundquist briefed OSC on the new contract in September? Also good to know their plans for the future, "next steps"...
He needs to go away now.
Even if he was not directly involved, he knew about it and took no action. Didn't Ron English know about the whistle-blower protection policy? Of course he did. Even if Ron English feared for his job, he should have reported the problem. He's a lawyer, an officer of the Court, and his professional ethics hold him to a higher standard. He didn't meet that higher standard.
Discouraged parent
English's conduct goes far beyond just knowing about it. He actively TOLD others to keep their (proverbial) mouths shut or else.
So did other managers, and are still doing so. The atmosphere of fear is being stoked every day on the inside so that much of the story has not yet been told.
For English to now try to say he was only following orders is absurd.
The allegations about being told that to criticize Potter was "racist" is something that comes from MGJ herself, who has said the same thing to others any time they took issue with any of her inner circle who happened to be minority.
It stinks and should be over, now!
LEAVE,LEAVE,LEAVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!