Keeping this Blog Alive

Among the many unusual things I've done in my life (not many but some), one was working as a volunteer investigator for one the Seattle public defender offices.  It was fascinating work and I got many insights to both sides of the law.

One thing that troubled me, though, was that we were told not to bother to look up any record of our clients.  We could look up the victims or the witnesses but we were told not to bother with our clients.  Naturally, I did and most did not appear to be in the church choir.

But a wise lawyer said to me, "We're not really defending any one person. We're defending the Constitution."

That's the point I was trying to make recently.  That if even one person tries to silence anyone else from speaking out on a public issue at a public forum (or reporting on such), it is a blow to all.

I'm not sure most of you understood the issue of my concern because it really was not about me (although I am grateful for the many people who were concerned and let me know).

It's about the life of this blog and the ability 
for Charlie and me to do this work. 

When you have someone who seeks to ban you from Board meetings, City Council meetings or education committee meetings at the Legislature as well as prevent you from talking to any of those who serve as elected officials for those entities on certain topics, well, that kind of effort might make this blog go away.

I believe this blog to be a good resource and sounding board - for better or worse.  Its existence, I believe, is a good thing.

I had also wanted to explain to readers that there is a law that protects anyone who wants to speak out on a public issue in a public forum from lawsuits that would seek to silence them.  I myself had not known about it and was glad to learn of its existence.

I thought it might be of interest given we are all discussing public issues in a public forum. 

But discretion being the better part of valor, we will have no more discussions on this particular topic except to say that Charlie and I will continue to write about public education issues, no matter where that leads us.

I like to think that's defending the Constitution.

(No comments needed for this thread and I will delete any comments about it in any other thread.)

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