Example of how SPS Staff Can't Get it Right
Tomorrow is the public hearing on the budget. This is a state-mandated requirement. There are rules about it.
But I noticed that the SPS website - the home page, the Board's home page, the Calendar page - none of them explained how to give input (other than showing up and THEN finding out).
No info on length of time at the hearing, no info on giving written comment - either e-mail or snail mail - or how long that written comment will be accepted.
I complained to the Board and now there's this at the district website. Again, no real info. The link to the "rules?" As of this writing, it doesn't work.
Again, what does it take? Is this that staff doesn't know how? Doesn't care?
I'm filing a complaint with the state.
But I noticed that the SPS website - the home page, the Board's home page, the Calendar page - none of them explained how to give input (other than showing up and THEN finding out).
No info on length of time at the hearing, no info on giving written comment - either e-mail or snail mail - or how long that written comment will be accepted.
I complained to the Board and now there's this at the district website. Again, no real info. The link to the "rules?" As of this writing, it doesn't work.
Again, what does it take? Is this that staff doesn't know how? Doesn't care?
I'm filing a complaint with the state.
Comments
let's hire more 100+ grand a year big shots and ... pay lip service to everything else!
there are no bugs in this system, there are
OnlyFeatures.
Do you think SPED would be in the position it's in if there were true OSPI enforcement powers.
An ALJ can't force the district to do anything, only the courts can. Which is why families never see results unless they fight hard or hire a lawyer.There's are no punitive damages under IDEA and usually you must pay your lawyer because awards are of the compensatory education type(they give you more of nothing).
Now messing with the OCR is a different story, in the end the OCR can pull all the districts federal funds. Usually districts comply, but occasionally a district will sue to overturn an OCR decision.
If your child's CR are violated there is no limit to damages that can be awarded by a jury.
Reality is, OSPI should have NEVER let things deteriorate to where they are,I blame the OSPI as much as the district for the mess.
--Michael
http://www.sao.wa.gov/investigations/Pages/CitizenHotline.aspx
Financial issues, ethics, conflict of interest.
Chris Thomas
Seattle Ethics and Elections Commission
(206) 615-0091
chris.thomas@seattle.gov
--Michael
There would be no Level 4 determination but for those of us willing to step forward and report violations. So, by all means, let OSPI know when SPS violates State and/or Fed law. Do it because you know it will help students, including others than your own, moving forward.
The list of violations just with our students is staggering and you would think being under level 4 would cause the district to at least stop violating the law...not at all in fact the issues are compounding and increasing in severity.
I have made one last attempt to reason with the district, but I planning on the worst.
I wish the OSPI would setup a drive thru service window down at the central office :)
--Michael
There are a number of JSCEE staff who go beyond the call of duty to get the job done. Is it perfect? No, but neither do you and I meet that standard. We should all aspire to meet that high bar when it comes to those that depend on adults....
I believe they should be terminated based on the emails alone.
BTW teachers and staff are personally liable for civil rights violations and the CBA cant save them.
I think they have had more than enough slack, time and money to get it right oh and the good ones just went right along with the bad ones...I have the emails to prove it!
--Michael
is it possible you could upload emails to scribd to give greater visibility to the issue?
FERPA
If that's asking too much, then the district is in worse trouble than we think.
Summer
I am hearing that perhaps this happened because of staff turnover. I'm not buying that. This is a pretty simple thing to do.
No, the Board has not voted on the budget. That comes in July.
To date we have turned the other cheek,emptied our savings, given the benefit of the doubt and provided workable solutions in attempt solve our students issues. In turn the district just delays and provides empty promises.
Delaying is the strategy laid out by legal. Since most of the staff are disingenuous they operate in CYA mode and can't keep track of the lies. This leads them deeper into the abyss.
In the end they hope you leave the district(very common) or your student will barely graduate where they give you the standard send off " We are sorry the system didn't work for you"
If we end up in due process all the information will be available after the ruling.
--Michael
Okay sure, the RCW isn't specific on the how but our district wrote its notice in a fairly vague fashion. It's basic communications 101. Every single public entity - should have the grace, the fairness to state how to give input, how long it will be taken (either written or verbal)and set the length of the meeting to the number of speakers allowed.
The district did none of this. But sure, if they want to say "legally we did the right thing," then boy, will that line enable them to say that a lot.
I think every doc from the district S/B scanned and made available online.
There should not be a lawyer client privilege for public schools.
All policy decisions should have a clear step by step public input process and board members should be required to read a summary report of public input before making decisions.
--Michael
"I find it surprising that I'm standing up for the public's ability to be able to know how to give public input on the single most important annual document the district puts out and I feel this "why are you doing this" attitude.". Welcome to the world of public discourse. Why would you think that everyone that reads and/or comments here would automatically agree with everything you do? Even your most ardent supporters are not going to agree with you all the time. Yet, you call this "attitude".
I haven't read the RCW cited, but having read many RCW's in my day I have yet to find one that REQUIRES elected officials to allow public comment at their meetings. Of course, many boards and councils do it because they know a large backlash would occur if they did not do so. But, it's been several years since I was digging through the RCW's, so maybe there has been a change.