The Right Person Got Elected in District IV
I print that title because I just read the Parent Map editorial about the School Board races.
It's a race that should be viewed as a bellwether for the future of the national debate about public education.
That's a big statement but the editorial goes on to note the concern over:
- big money in a school board campaign
- negative campaigning
Dale Estey, who claimed not to be aware of or in control of some of her campaign P.R. machinery, also admitted to me on Election Night that such tactics are a calculated risk. She said experts had told her that the gains from negative publicity far outstrip the losses.
This blind faith in "experts" contradicts the image Dale Estey sought to portray, that of a homegrown girl in touch with the concerns of Seattle families. Had she listened to the people whose doorbells she rang, instead of experts, and followed her own instincts, she might have understood early on that negativity was a problem, especially when negative ads were purchased by wealthy donors.
I said this as well that if Dale Estey had been running her own campaign, I doubt she would have gone negative. BUT the fact that she knew (and seemingly continued to know) that others were doing negative campaigning on her behalf means she just wanted to win. That's politics but apparently it's not the kind of politics in Seattle School Board races that will win out.
- "passion pays off" - meaning Sue made the case for her real concern and knowledge about SPS and had specifics. Dale Estey had a 10,000 foot view and I think that hurt her.
- teachers and testing - two big issues for all districts and parents.
One oddity:
Buoyed by election, but tainted by the history of a dysfunctional Seattle School Board, Peters, who has a reputation for "not suffering fools" will have to carefully consider her style, which critics have found confrontational.
Huh? Peters isn't tainted by the "dysfunctional" Board - the current members are.
I can agree with this:
Ironically, both sides of the debate have the same goal: Ensuring that all students have equal access to an excellent eduction.
This is a golden opportunity for moderation.
This is a wake-up call. For all sides of the debate.
Comments
I think it's a fair conclusion that, biased or not, this blog rules for getting to the bottom of SPS.
I think this blog falls under "Essential Services" at this point, even with it's occasionally biased viewpoints. At least the writers acknowledge it, btw. Something the Times would never do.
KUTGW!
WSDWG
The first article, like this one, had loaded language and an obvious bias (i.e. "zebra confronting a lion", "self-proclaimed school advocate" etc.) I'm not sure if Parent Map is a reputable periodical, blog or what, but some of Krupnick's statements show a lack of journalistic standards - yet she is "education editor".
i'll stick with the SSS blog for my news.
"Dale Estey, who claimed not to be aware of or in control of some of her campaign P.R. machinery, also admitted to me on Election Night that such tactics are a calculated risk. She said experts had told her that the gains from negative publicity far outstrip the losses.
This blind faith in "experts" contradicts the image Dale Estey sought to portray, that of a homegrown girl in touch with the concerns of Seattle families".
Estey was a lobbyist and her ability to double talk was always disturbing. Her false claim to have run Locke's DC office was also disturbing. It seems Estey was willing to win this race at any cost.
We can only hope not to see Estey again. However, like every other highly connected politician i.e. Sundquist and Maier, I'm sure she will turn-up in another political office.
Guess not so much ;o) - interesting piece.