Stand for Children Tells Board to Sit Down and Shut Up

Amazing.  Not only is Stand for Children NOT a "education group"; now they are against basic democracy.

Here's what they said yesterday:

"Ask Seattle Public Schools to let the people lead on charter schools.  Instead of waiting to see what the will of the voters is, the Seattle School board wants to preempt our right to decide. That's not what we want from our elected officials"

(And I note they didn't put this on their blog but in a super secret message to their supporters.) 

But let's look at that request.

We elect people to make decisions on whatever entity they represent.  That's their job.  And, we ask public officials - all the time - about their stands on issues.  Jay Inslee, Rob McKenna, everyone.

And yet, Stand believes that somehow the Board is to stand mutely by over an issue that will directly affect every single child in SPS (and the taxpayers of Seattle).  How much reasoning is there in that thought?  I submit there is none.

No one is saying the voters can't decide.  No one.

But yes, elected officials, as a body, and as private citizens, do get to take a stand and to suggest otherwise is wrong.

Hilariously, they ask that the Board "set aside their resolution until "AFTER the election.  And the point of taking the vote after the election would be?

Things must be getting desperate over there if they are against basic democracy.


mirmac1 said…
Totally absurd! What would be interesting to know is, are there any I-1240 sympathizers on the board and do they want S4C to bully the others so they don't have to vote yeah or nay and potentially piss off alot of people. Sounds like standard operating procedures for these folks.
Anonymous said…
Sorry. But exactly when was SFC ever not against basic democracy? They are Right Wing Union Busters, first and foremost, happily paving the road to privatization. That's it. That's their "Stand." Between their snarky pro-McKenna/Inslee-bashing tweets and their outright lies about charter success rates, they are a Cheney-Rovian stew of corrupt morals and scruples.

Where are the anti-1240 TV ads? Oh, I guess "the people" can't afford millions in truthful TV ads to counter the one per-centers' misrepresentations and lies.

I hope we're recording all this for our kids, so they can watch the death of the US Public Education system on the History Channel someday in 2050 or so. WSDWG
mirmac1 said…
I'd rather listen to Diane Ravitch, myself:

If You Have Friends in Washington State…
Eric B said…
Ha! I saw this and immediately wrote to the School Board. About how the conversion charter would make long-term capacity planning impossible. Thanks for the suggestion to write, Stand, I took full advantage of it!
Anonymous said…
That's so crazy! A publically elected body is supposed to be quiet while they pour money and influence into other groups, newspaper boards, etc. who use their voices to promote their views. But publically elected offices are to be quiet? That's democracy?

That's so warped that it should make us laugh and cry at the same time.

Anonymous said…
Here’s a good article on this mentality:

mirmac1 said…
From HuffPost:

Meanwhile, the IRS has signaled it plans closer scrutiny of charter schools' tax-exempt status if they rely on for-profit management companies to provide their classroom space and run their academic programs, Hall said. He sent his clients a long memo this summer warning that the stepped-up IRS oversight could put some at "significant risk."

If that weren't enough to make investors wary, several well-known charter schools have run into significant legal and fiscal hurdles in recent months.

Missouri regulators shut down six campuses run by Imagine Schools, one of the nation's largest for-profit charter chains, because of poor academic performance. A judge in California ruled that Aspire Public Schools, a large non-profit chain, hadn't secured the proper approval for six of its schools and would have to get permission from local boards of education to continue running them. Local officials yanked the charter of a high-achieving middle school in Georgia over concerns about mismanagement.

All told, about 15 percent of the 6,700 charter schools that have been launched in the United States in the past two decades have since closed, primarily because of financial troubles, according to the Center for Education Reform, which supports charter schools.

This fall alone, more than 150 established charter schools didn't open their doors to students.


Let's see. That means six of I-1240's charters will fail, screw hundreds of students and families, and burden the struggling public schools.

Charter School Financing Gets You A Green Card? The New U.S. Visa Rush
Anonymous said…
Me three! I get SFC's emails and as soon as I read their absurd request, I promptly used the information they provided to email the board and encourage them to follow through with their vote.

QAE Parent
Anonymous said…
ditto. i'm also a SFC subscriber ('know thy enemy' and all that) and also emailed the board in support of their vote to oppose.

-no on 1240
Anonymous said…
I was both surprised and heartened to hear on KUOW this morning that Banda does not support this charter bill, based on the lack of WA parent groundswell asking for them and on the lack of accountability once they land in a state.

Not every leader has been willing to state his/her position, whether yay or nay. That he was willing to put aside politics and offer his opinion impressed me.

Po3 said…
How absurd.

Now watch the board actually do it...

Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said…
Why does Stand On Children pull this crap? Because too many of their opponents can be relied on to do 2 things:

1. cower and whimper and snivel about the lack of civility and other dilettante concerns.

2. attack fellow opponents who attack Stand's attacks!

Come On Scolds! Tell me how by fighting back I'm making things worse! Tell me how I'm lowering the quality of civic discourse! DO NOT go after them for being liars who are the lackeys of the rich, lackeys who are trying to turn us all into doormats and serfs! Go after ME for attacking liars!

mirmac1 said…
"Anonymous said...

Especially absurd when one realizes that, if the initiative passes, school boards might lose the right over their own buildings, due to the "parent trigger" that's included in this legislation"

Anon, sign your post or it's lost

Gotta get my thesaurus to get another word to describe the duplicitous machinations that characterize our board's working relationship. The president sics his media buddies or "education advocates" on his compatriots so that he can get his way. If he ain't bullying, he's condescending. The picture that comes to mind is something like this: "Trust me baby, the numbers add up"
Anonymous said…
To quote the X-files, how about deceive, inveigle and obfuscate?

Anonymous said…

Public School Parent
mirmac1 said…
How about deceptive, dastardly, and malarkey?
Anonymous said…
Looks like the ONLY way to assure viable alternatives in SPS is to support charter schools.

JA and Pinehurst have been thrown under the bus. Moved, closed, reconfigured. And that's after those families were assured programs if only they would just start something up.

Summit was actually closed. 1 fine day, somebody decided it was over. Sorry folks.

African American Academy, also closed one fine day.

Center School has been threatened closure. It's program deemed unimportant.

NOVA has been moved like a ping pong ball. Each move changes the quality and style of instruction.

Thornton Creek is having its property swallowed up. The middle school option for its graduates at Salmon Bay guarantee tossed out by a stroke of the pen.

People can quibble all they want over test scores of charters - which seem on par with the other places. At least the families attending charters could have an alternative education without the constant threat of closure or other significant operational disruption.

As much as the charter-haters love to propose that our "option" schools serve the same purpose as charters - it's pretty hard to to argue the fact that SPS doesn't value alternative learning environment and that they are NOT stable places to put your kid into.

And with today's issues in the NE, what better way to keep JA K-8in it's location, perfectly suited to it, than to turn it into a charter that the district can't touch. I'm all for that!

JA parent
Unknown said…
Oh JA, I understand your bitterness but if you think there will be lots of grassroots charters popping up, think again.

They want KIPP, Aspire, Green Dot - name brands and believe me, THAT'S whose going to get the preference from the new Charter Commission.

Also, "without the constant threat of closure'? That's the mantra for charters, remember? Accountability. If they don't measure up, apparently, they will be closed.

I'm sure charters do look alluring but this particular initiative will only hurt our district and the rest of the districts throughout the state.
Anonymous said…
Letters to the editor at the Seattle Times on I-1240

Public School Parent
Anonymous said…
@JA parent: After years of moving in the wrong direction, SPS is at least moving in the right direction. Whiplash is the result when ee have exploding enrollment, few dollars and high costs. NOVA moving back to NOVA, with improvements to the building, is better than being co-housed at Meany with SBOC, and we need Meany as a Middle School again. It should've never closed. All this shuffling sucks. My kids got moved too. But we're surviving, and I care too about the future generations of kids and the strength of public schools which are essential to our democracy. Not to be all high and mighty, but we need strong public schools and there's no reason SPS can't work better if we simply hire the right people for the jobs, instead of agenda-driven resume builders who only care about their own careers. Just my .02. WSDWG
Jan said…
JA parent: This has the same feel to me as the "never waste a good crisis" argument. There is no doubt that we are in a huge space squeeze right now. There is no doubt that if the District -- back in the MGJ days -- had gotten competent demographic help and had better decision-making from staff, we could/would have SAVED the $100 million that we have spent/will spend closing a bunch of schools (and moving their kids) and then reopening them (and moving them back). We could have built an entire school with that $100 million.

We still have some weak board members, but we have a MUCH better superintendent, and at least SOME competent board members -- and we JUST got the shovels out THIS year (Banda joined the District in June, the 2 new board members that broke the back of the old gang of 4 joined last winter, and spent the first few months fighting off a smear attack orchestrated by those who had supported their opponents.

Seattle parents value option schools because they value choice of curriculum (not management), local control, and autonomy. Look at the Charter movement nation-wide, and you see very little of this. Lots of KIPP and Green Dot. Lots of siphoning of funds to management organizations, textbook providers, etc. Lots of "dictating" to parents how the schools will be run, and who will make the rules and pick the materials.

COULD there be a charter school bill that actually did basically what the MOU process does (negotiates autonomy in specific areas)? Yes. But it is categorically, emphatically NOT this bill.

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

Seattle Public Schools and Their Principals

COVID Issues Heating up for Seattle Public Schools