United Vote or Split Vote on Seattle Schools' Nyland for Super?
To have a split vote would look terrible (no matter how large or
small). For the purposes of whoever is driving this process, the Board should be united on who they pick; otherwise, it
signals no faith in the choice and/or the process.
It would also serve to isolate whoever votes no. In essence, they may become a present-day Mary Bass (the former director who frequently was the lone vote against many issues. She ended up being the canary in the coal mine for former Superintendent Olchefske's $30M+ unraveling.)
However, the courage to say NO is more valuable to them than any good will. It means they stand with the parents and community who knew that the search process had begun and expected them to finish it in good faith. Or, AT LEAST have the grace to tell people in a timely, rational fashion what they were going to do.
Here's how I see the vote.
Definites
Blanford (goes w/o saying)
Marty (she's already said it)
Sharon (she wrote it)
Maybe
Sherry - Although after her performance on the Gates Foundation grant it's likely to be a yes, Sherry has a lot of law and order in her and I don't know how much she will like coming to the table this way.
Harium - He's also a probably except that I am told that at his October meeting this subject came up and he said that some on the Board wanted no search but he thought it was a better idea to have one. Has he changed his mind? There's something to ask him.
No's*
Sue
Betty
*These two poor women are going to be under HUGE pressure to vote yes and will get hounded by the powers that be to do this.
I'm not sure I would blame them if they did but they would have my undying admiration and support if they say, "No, I won't be bullied." Because that's what this is.
A reader suggested to me that Nyland told the Board he will walk if not given the job outright. This is fairly plausible especially if some of the powers that be put a bug in his ear.
After this is all done, I'll tell you what I REALLY think about Nyland's thought process but I prefer to keep my own counsel at this point.
Send those e-mails to the maybe and no people.
sherry.carr@seattleschools.org
harium.martin-morris@seattleschools.org
sue.peters@seattleschools.org
betty.patu@seattleschools.org
It would also serve to isolate whoever votes no. In essence, they may become a present-day Mary Bass (the former director who frequently was the lone vote against many issues. She ended up being the canary in the coal mine for former Superintendent Olchefske's $30M+ unraveling.)
However, the courage to say NO is more valuable to them than any good will. It means they stand with the parents and community who knew that the search process had begun and expected them to finish it in good faith. Or, AT LEAST have the grace to tell people in a timely, rational fashion what they were going to do.
Here's how I see the vote.
Definites
Blanford (goes w/o saying)
Marty (she's already said it)
Sharon (she wrote it)
Maybe
Sherry - Although after her performance on the Gates Foundation grant it's likely to be a yes, Sherry has a lot of law and order in her and I don't know how much she will like coming to the table this way.
Harium - He's also a probably except that I am told that at his October meeting this subject came up and he said that some on the Board wanted no search but he thought it was a better idea to have one. Has he changed his mind? There's something to ask him.
No's*
Sue
Betty
*These two poor women are going to be under HUGE pressure to vote yes and will get hounded by the powers that be to do this.
I'm not sure I would blame them if they did but they would have my undying admiration and support if they say, "No, I won't be bullied." Because that's what this is.
A reader suggested to me that Nyland told the Board he will walk if not given the job outright. This is fairly plausible especially if some of the powers that be put a bug in his ear.
After this is all done, I'll tell you what I REALLY think about Nyland's thought process but I prefer to keep my own counsel at this point.
Send those e-mails to the maybe and no people.
sherry.carr@seattleschools.org
harium.martin-morris@seattleschools.org
sue.peters@seattleschools.org
betty.patu@seattleschools.org
Comments
Failure to receive a unanimous vote is a leadership issue.
-Not sad
It's not a vote AGAINST him. It's a vote for input and process as both Peaslee and McLaren said they would have when they were campaigning.
Just like Enfield, he should throw his hat in the ring and be judged against any others who apply.
It is NOT just about qualifications but about fit. I am dismayed because I know two local people who I think might be great but we'll never know because the Board made a secret, unilateral decision.
Excellent point. Failure to receive a unanimous vote will not work well going forward.
"But some aren’t taking a position on whether the public should have more chance to share its views, including the Alliance for Education, a nonprofit fundraising and advocacy group.
Sara Morris, the alliance’s president, said her organization has no position on whether the board should seek more public input."
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2025131735_nylandfoloxml.html
"This time, the School Board is offering no organized opportunity for the public to weigh in beyond the chance to email board members or sign up for one of the limited number of two-minute public comment slots at Wednesday’s meeting. "
What are they hiding?
I believe that with principals and supers it should be a matter of course to do a search after an interim appointment.
Former SPSParent
I agree; with any interim, there should be a search.
Whether the Board should choose Dr. Nyland or not is a question that we can discuss, but whether the Board should do it without an opportunity for public review, input, and comment is not a question worthy of discussion.
I'm flabbergasted by all this.
- North-end Mom
After all, Mr. Nyland is quoted in the Times story as saying he'd stay "two, three maybe four years..." so it's not like this whole hoopla won't be happening again sooner rather than later.
What is the danged hurry? This whole scenario stinks...as Charlie points out -2 weeks would be that detrimental???
(and yes, I've already written the Board)
reader47
One, Nyland may have said he'll leave if there's a search (a la Enfield).
Two, the powers that be want it to be so.
There is no reason to vote on this issue this Wednesday.
And WTF with McLaren complaining about time constraints and needing to specify a search firm by 12/3 at the absolute latest? Did they not know Nyland was interim? Did they no promise a full search when they appointed him? Sounds like screwed up and didn't act quickly enough on the search that was supposedly underway...
Half Full
I think that's possible. The search was supposed to start in September. SPS has had more than enough things to keep them busy this fall.
Nyland also might have told SPS that he would resign if not immediately given the offer, but that would make more sense if he were a decade younger and looking to move to a more prestigious role to build his career. Nyland's nearly retired. If he did drive that bargain, what would he do if SPS turned him down? Calmly retire? Go to another district? Go back to doing leadership training, which he was doing after he retired from Marysville in 2013?
It's not like they were not working on it. They stopped.
Why is the real question.
After the vote, I'll explain what I believe some of Nyland's thinking is.
Maybe he'll shed some light on this tomorrow night. If he avoids any questions, it's not good.
Board is working through the long list of attributes they want in a new Super. Somebody speaks up and says, "Doesn't that describe Nyland to a T?" Discussion of just hiring him ensues.
For the record, I don't have any inside information. This is just another possible scenario that I think satisfies Occam's Razor better than "this is how the powers that be want it" (although about as well as "appoint me permanent or I walk"). It's also a way to see the situation that assumes good intentions for everyone. I do think there should be an open hiring process.
And for the record, the Special Education Advisory and Advocacy Council, SEAAC? That is the Superintendent's advisory and advocacy council. It's been scheduled by unknown administrators for the time of day when our sped families are most challenged, 4.30pm on a weekday, and, though starting 5 months late the SEAAC (such as it is) is scheduled for every other month. There are only 2 returning board members from the previous year (both unable to attend a meeting at 4.30pm on a weekday) and anybody with a longer institutional memory or history has been taken off of the board.
AnneS.
Melissa, would you mind telling this newcomer what it means that Blamsford is a yes vote, "it goes without saying?"
Just stsrting my learning in this topic/with SPS & the board.
Blanford is the powers that be friend. He seemingly does not really like working with parents/community. He hasn't been on the board long enough to really know the district well (and seemingly isn't trying that hard).
He DID say, at a committee meeting, that he wanted a national search. So he and Martin-Morris are on record as saying they wanted a search.
If that's true, then they should vote no but I don't know if either will.
"Seattle School Board members said they will soon outline a recruitment plan for hiring the next permanent Superintendent, a process that will include community engagement."
Half Full
"As long as we're all speculating baselessly, here's another possible way that it may have unfolded behind closed doors:
Board is working through the long list of attributes they want in a new Super. Somebody speaks up and says, "Doesn't that describe Nyland to a T?" Discussion of just hiring him ensues."
I suppose that's one possibility, but it surely doesn't explain why the rush. Has the board put together a description of what they're looking for in a Supt, and if so, does anyone know where we can find it?
Half Full
As far as the rush, I think Peaslee's statement can be taken at face value. They need to decide now whether they go to a search or whether they just hire Nyland. My read of the tea leaves is they got 90% of the way through the process to go to a search and then some number of directors decided that sticking with Nyland was better.
But again, I don't know anything other than what I read in the papers.
Eric is always the voice of reason and good manners. I wish I could believe good intent but I frequently find that there are always many issues to any district decision, not all of them good.
If any a decision was away from children and ALL about adults, it's this one.