Who's In?

It's an interesting thing to see who has endorsed which campaign around I-1240.

First, you can thank me for the Yes side even having an endorsement page because they didn't have one for months.  But I kept calling it out at debates and I guess they got embarrassed.  What is kind of cute is the little mini-bios they have for every single person listed (but it does make the page look longer).

For variety, there isn't a lot of comparison.  The Yes is a lot of business groups/ed reformers and, for the elected officials, Republicans (with the "roadkill" Dems thrown in).

The No side/No side is quite varied and long on elected officials (but yes, very Democrat-heavy).

As far as educators and those in education, there is no comparison.  Educators, administrators and elected officials in education are overwhelmingly against I-1240. 

Community groups?  Quite a variety especially up against the Yes side.

Newspapers?  Very much for the Yes side but I note that there is an oddly same argument in most of the newspapers (almost akin to having received talking points).  At least three newspapers got it wrong about how many times we have voted on charters (which tells you how much homework they did in getting to their editorial opinions).

 Still there were some newspapers saying no like the Issaquah Press (which was interesting because their PTA folks in the region are charter-crazy), The Stranger, NW Asian Weekly, and Publicola. 

But I do want to call out some people who DID step up early to be counted as being against 1240:  legislators Gerry Pollet, Marcie Maxwell, Bob Hasegawa, and councilman John Stokes over in Bellevue.

In Seattle, City Councilmembers Nick Licata, Jean Godden, Bruce Harrell and Sally Clark stepped up to be counted.

This kind of political courage can't be overlooked because folks, if you want to see people clam up - talk about charter schools.  Mum's the word in some rooms.

Meanwhile, Mayor McGinn, Councilmembers Tim Burgess, Mike O'Brien, Tom Rasmussen and Richard Conlin look away and demur.   Okay but if it passes and they see the bad outcomes to Seattle schools, they DON'T get to say "I didn't know."  They DO know and they are choosing to look the other way.  That's on them to explain later on (especially if anyone is running for Mayor).

Then we have the curious case of the PTA.  I'll do a separate thread on this topic but as to who is stepping up, well, it's a head-scratcher.

The Washington State PTA DID read the initiative and DID find it lacking (hence their NO on 1240) but they studiously said they wouldn't campaign against it.  That is curious given that they can all read and understand ALL the outcomes to our public schools.  You'd think that would have galvanized them.

Then, the Seattle Council has a panel "discussion" recently about I-1240 that was not good. That it included an avid supporter of charters but no one from the No side made it a little suspect.  That the document handed out about I-1240 had a "pro" side but not a "con" side made that a suspect as well.

 And, the SCPTA says:
 SCPTSA doesn't have any plans for taking a position on I-1240.  

Why wouldn't the largest PTA council in the state take a stand especially when the state PTA did?  

I note that it doesn't seem like many PTA units took up this issue either. 

It is a delicate situation but if it passes, it will be a total game changer for our district.  It should matter.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Talk about squirrelly, look no furthur than Reuven Carlyle. What happened to him?

mittyesque
10/30/12, 3:45 PM
mirmac1 said…
The SC PTSA. Why do they bother? I can't even stand one meeting with them.

Can I get a refund over hear'?
10/30/12, 3:54 PM
Eric B said…
One thing I do appreciate about some legislators is that while they support the measure and are planning on voting for it, they have not endorsed a yes vote. That may be a matter of looking out for their political skin, but at least it thins down the ranks of the Yes endorsers. I'm deliberately not naming names, since I (a) don't want to give the Yes people any more ammunition and (b) don't particularly want to embarrass/shame them. The latter is mostly because I saw the results of a letter trying to put the legislator on the spot and it wasn't pretty. If anything, I think it hardened the legislator's position. The embarrass and shame will come in the next election cycle.
10/30/12, 4:56 PM
Mark Ahlness said…
Interesting to find an ex Board Director in the column for financial contributions to the Yes campaign.
10/30/12, 5:03 PM
Unknown said…
Mark, you know that Steve Sundquist is likely first in line to hand in his application for the Charter Commission if this passes,

I have a running list; I should publish it.
10/30/12, 5:44 PM
Just saying said…
Politicians don't get to hide. They are the people representing us and we deserve to know what they think. If anything, they have show a complete disregard for their constituents. And yes, democracy can be ugly.
10/30/12, 5:56 PM
Just saying said…
Real ugliness is turning your back on your party, voting to eliminate funding from an already stressed stystem, agreeing to give away public properties to private entities and advocating for taxation without representation.

So, if folks want to call individuals out for their actions, I see no problem.
10/30/12, 6:03 PM
Eric B said…
What I was getting at is that even fi they aren't voting with us, at least they're not giving the public relations coup to the other side. I would like them to vote with us, but I don't have any illusions that we'll get every D legislator. Given that's the case, I'd rather not have them trumpeting their Yes vote to the planet.
10/30/12, 6:06 PM
What list? said…
Melissa,

What is a running list? Do you mean a list of individuals considering a position on the Charter Commission?
10/30/12, 9:38 PM
Unknown said…
What list? That's my own personal "who I think" wants a place on the Commission. Steve Sundquist is at the top of it.
10/31/12, 9:11 AM
Anonymous said…
Steve Sundquist..Ha1...that's a good one, all right!

Hi, my name is Steve, and, dear Governor, I'd like to have you appoint me to the charter commission. I have experience as a school board member in the largest district in the state. Please, though, never mind that I lost my seat because essentially...well, ummm...I neglected to fulfill my duties around oversight and accountability.

But I think I would do a GREAT job on the charter commission. And I am a strong advocate for charter schools. I became a strong advocate for charters immediately upon the loss of my seat on the Seattle School Board.

signed,
I am NOT Steve Sundquist
10/31/12, 4:39 PM
Anonymous said…
Tim Burgess is pro-charter IMO. He maxed out to a candidate in the 11th LD primary-- before endorsements were even made by the 11th LD Dems for primary candidates--who was the only Democrat to be in favor of charter schools.
11/8/12, 7:54 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