Seattle School Board Meeting - Maybe a Hot Summer Night and a Full Moon

Those two factors - a hot summer night and a full moon - might just set things off.  Word is that many Middle College supporters will be at the meeting and want to be heard.  Here are some updates from the supporters (and that includes me):
SPS closed the Highpoint location of Middle College High School.

SPS has removed Middle College High School founding teacher Roger Rigor from the UW location (aka the Ida B. Wells School).  (He has been reassigned to The Center School.) Administrators have removed three other teachers of color.

SPS has removed the Middle College High School social justice critical pedagogy curriculum and replaced it with the Bill Gates championed Big History curriculum.

Kshama Sawant enters the fray. She wants to get other council members involved.  As well, King County councilmember Larry Gossett has expressed his concerns. 

So what's on the agenda tomorrow night?  A lot.

Early on there will be a "Levies 2016 Update" that starts off with this ludicrous statement:

Safe, healthy, efficient, and well-maintained facilities provide a positive environment for our students, staff and community.

Words, just words. Our buildings are not-well maintained and it is directly because senior staff have chosen to spend maintenance dollars in other places.  Period.

It's another busy agenda with 14 items on the Consent Agenda, 25 speakers signed up for public testimony with 11 on the waitlist, 14 Action items and 7 Intro items.  Most of the speakers are speaking to either the Seattle Preschool Program Service agreement (Intro), the ending of suspensions in elementary schools (Intro), and Middle College.

Action Items

- Resolution on use of SBAC.  I have to smile.  This resolution is so de-fanged that it comes across as fairly timid.  And, I see Director Peaslee has made it worse by adding an amendment to remove one section.  (I note this amendment could not have been on the agenda before Monday, maybe even Tuesday, as I was checking the agenda.  Is she going to get chastised like Peters and Patu when they did the same thing on another topic?)

Remove the 2nd BE IT RESOLVED statement on page 2, which states “Now BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Directors of Seattle Public Schools calls on Congress to continue to permit students to voluntarily opt out of taking SBA tests, but to discontinue the penalizing practice of giving these students’ scores of 0%. This practice invalidates statistical accuracy and misrepresents the cumulative scores of students within a school;

Peaslee's amendment says that not all the Board Directors were there when it was added (well, whose fault is that?) and that the Superintendent doesn't support it.  Fine, but it's a Board resolution after all and doesn't the Superintendent work for the Board?  He does.  Peaslee' pointedly says that if the statement is not removed, the whole Resolution may be in danger. 

- Approval of Families and Education levy grants which includes putting the money back for Emerson and Sand Point.

- Approval of grant from LEV Foundation for $1M a year for South Shore Pre-K-8 for each of the next two years.  They note that this is down from previous years where the New School Foundation was giving about $1.5M (about 40% of SS's budget).  This $1M represents 20% of their current budget.

- Resolution to approve Operations and Capital budgets for 2015-2106.  I was unable to testify at the public hearing last week on these two budgets (darn you, Comcast guy).  I still have not heard a complete accounting of where the $39M that is being taken from the Capital budget to the General Fund is going.  The only real specific is $8M for servicing the debt on the JSCEE.  It's called transparency but apparently we are all just to trust staff. 

- Extension of lease on Nordic Heritage Museum in the Webster building for 2 more years.  So even as they list the building on BTA IV, they wouldn't get to work on it for at least two years.

- Movement of $3M from BEX IV program contingency fund for the World School project at TT Minor.  

There is are two glaring issues.  One, the reasons they give for this $3M need seem lame to me. 
Two, this project already has a CEP "loan" of $3.6M.

Intro Items

- Seattle Preschool Program Service Agreement.  Many, many holes and many, many places where staff is directed to do work to figure out what impacts this will have on SPS.  Naturally, this costs the district time and money for staff to do this.  Did anyone do a cost analysis on whether this is worth it in the first place given the district's lack of space?

Another thing that is a mystery - what happened to the Gates grant that was to fund the first year at Bailey-Gatzert?  Seems mum's the word.  I also wonder about the wording about who enrolls at Bailey-Gatzert preschool in the future.  Is it to be just students from that region as some Board members have asked or will any child be able to be there?

- Resolution for a moratorium on out-of-school suspensions for elementary students in 2015-2016 and development of a plan to reduce this across all grades.  And hey, it's from the Justice Thomas of the School Board, Director Martin-Morris.

This is a big one and an important one.

Lastly, I see from the calendar at the end of the agenda that there are no more Director Community meetings until mid-August.


Anonymous said…
What a HOT mess!

ForTheRecord said…
Director Peters attempted to have a conversation regarding SBAC. Neither the Executive Committee or Curriculum and Instruction Committee would allow a discussion.

Director Peters and Patu forced the issue of SBAC into public light, and have the largest district in the state take a position on SBAC and I thank them. Without Peters/Patu forcing the issue of SBAC this issue would not have been discussed.
Anonymous said…
"the Justice Thomas of the School Board, Director Martin-Morris"


Whoa. What SPS central staff is doing to Middle College has gone beyond appalling and is now fully into offensive and unjust territory. Firing teachers of color? Replacing a social justice curriculum with some idiotic nonsense from Bill Gates? That's horrifying and I have to say it smacks of discrimination.

This, right here, is a perfect example of why we need board members who will hold the district staff accountable and not just stand back while the staff do awful things like this.

Also, thank you Kshama Sawant for speaking up on this critical issue.
Watermelon, meaning that Justice Thomas rarely speaks and rarely puts forth the majority opinion. Director Martin-Morris is equally reticient especially around putting forth BARs.
Anonymous said…
So Robert, you're accusing Michael Tolley of discriminating against black students.

Ya that will hold up. Think about it.

Clain, I don't know what Michael Tolley's role is in this at all. And you'll note that I said this was offensive and unjust, and "smacks of discrimination." That's not the same thing as saying staff are indeed discriminating against black students - but I do think that these actions do raise the question of whether students of color and teachers of color are being treated fairly, and that question needs an answer.

I urge the board to listen to the teachers, parents, and students of Middle College and follow their wishes.
Po3 said…
"SPS has removed the Middle College High School social justice critical pedagogy curriculum and replaced it with the Bill Gates championed Big History curriculum."

Isn't this basically what happened at the Center School when they removed Greenberg and Courageous Conversations curriculum? Or was it reinstated along w/ Greenberg?

Fascinating to me that the UW now requires all students to complete a Diversity requirement:

"As you learn from others who are different from you, whether in terms of race, gender, class, sexuality, religion, ability, age, nationality or ethnicity, you’ll develop a stronger understanding of your own history, beliefs and values, and you’ll be better prepared to understand and work with others."
??? said…
I think for MW to post the comparison of HMM to CT as they are very similar in their roles in their respective cohorts is apt. I am not a 100 % watcher of both but from my perspective they do not lead or say much in public and I hate most of their votes; They are also similar. For MW to say this irrespective of race is what we all need ... Race neutral.

enoughof enoughalready
Anonymous said…
I am watching the live feed of the Board meeting. I am seething with anger. What the District is doing to these Middle College kids is -- there's no other word for it -- criminal.

My friend Rachel Harmon expressed it best: "What's wrong with you people?" I'll tell you this. I want the paper trail of who decided to close this program, and I want that person, or those persons, run out of the district.

I am so mad I don't think I should say any more. I want the new Board to reinstate this program in West Seattle, with its curriculum intact -- no ifs, ands, or buts about it, and no other request from staff should move forward until it is.

-- Ivan Weiss
????????? said…
I am sorry. WS this WS that. I have no concern about WS I only care about SEATTLE. Are there similar programs in Seattle that these kids can go to? Are they located where most of the kids who need them? I have read there are two other programs; is that wrong.
Lynn said…
You should be sorry.

There are two more Middle College program locations - at the University of Washington and at Northgate Mall. How do you suggest these students get there? I don't know if you've noticed but they tend to be kids who are struggling with something outside of school. Are these the kids for whom you want to make it more difficult to get to school? You are supporting an action by the district that will increase the likelihood these kids will not graduate. What do you think is more important for the district to do than to supoort kids who are at risk of not graduating?

You're full of questions. Have you done your research? How much money is this going to save? How exactly could kids from West Seattle get to the UW campus? Did you look into the differences between the Interagency and Middle College programs? Please share the information you've found.

???? - you do know these are at-risk kids living in a fairly isolated area? So if you are fine with the costs to transport them to these other locations, fine. But the District's reasons are poor and suspect for closing the High Point location as well as displacing a teacher from Ida B. Wells.

I will again state - if you are not Prince, then give yourself a name. A symbol is not a name here.
Unknown said…
Please watch the video from tonight's school board meeting when it's available online. The Middle College speakers spoke eloquently about their experience at High Point and Ida B. Wells sites. Our district is doing a gross injustice to these youth, their teachers and families.

I was so proud of the young lady who interrupted MacLaren's babble about the staff not being qualified to teach these youth. Hmmm -yet by some mysterious fluke the program has succeeded in graduating many disenfranchised youth who would not have succeeded in our traditional high schools.

-Voting for Leslie in West Seattle
Unknown, that was one weird moment for McLaren. I have no idea why she decided to relate the history of Middle College but it went off the rails from the start when she couldn't quite remember which location was the first one. The audience, who had been respectful of all the speakers, started a low rumble of discontent and then that young woman stood and recited an MLK,Jr. quote.

I was quite surprised at how fast Peaslee cleared the room rather than just waiting for security to escort the young woman out. Maybe she thought it would just raise the level of unhappiness. Blanford, after the break, was a scold, saying they had a long agenda to work thru.

I absolutely get that - I was there for 4 hours - but most of the directors seem to miss that this chipping away at programs that serve at-risk youth (and do it well) is a serious issue.
Anonymous said…
Off-topic, but still relevant: Wallyhood has a series of question/interviews with SB candidates Rick Burke and Laura Gramer. Burke specifically refers or the Middle College fiasco (that's my tie-in). Anyway, a pretty comprehensive set of questions and answers, good to read.

Anonymous said…
The characterization of Martin-Morris as similar to Clarence Thomas is not an accurate depiction. You are right about one thing: Clarence Thomas rarely speaks in court; in fact, he has often gone 5 years without asking any questions during the presentation of cases. When he does speak, however, he has a booming voice and is rather gruff. However, he is the author of more opinions (37) this year than anyone else on the court. He is also more likely to write a dissenting opinion, as he has written 19 dissenting opinions. You can check out more statistics about Thomas and all your favorite Supremes at
Martin-Morris, on the other hand, speaks fairly often. He is soft-spoken, rambling, often given to lengthy pauses, and often hard to follow. Frankly, I am often impatient listening to him, wishing he could skip the travelogue portion of his speech and cut to the chase a little sooner. Furthermore, his writing style reflects his speech style; he needs a good editor.

Anonymous said…
about the above comment from GL "+1"

-- Dan Dempsey
Anonymous said…
Oh no Mr. Burke!

Rick Burke: I worked with Dr. Nyland on the Washington State Board of Education Math Panel in 2007, and recently had an opportunity to talk with him as a School Board candidate. I have found him to be experienced and reasonable, and also believe that some of his actions in the last year show a lot of promise for the future. Based on this perspective, I rate him a solid 7, and look forward to the opportunity to work with him and refine that number.

Specifically, I’m supportive of his recent “100 days of customer service” initiative, which I would like to see continue as the new normal for SSD. I have also been pleased with improvements in special education and his candid handling of recent district mis-steps, such as the response to the inadvertent release of over 7,500 student records containing personally identifiable information.

There goes my vote!

Sped parent
Anonymous said…
Clearly Burke not only has no idea what he is talking about, he has no idea the gate-keeping that goes on with information at JSCEE. Who wants another school board director like that? No to Burke.

SPED parent2
Maureen said…
Sped parents: Have any other directors done a better job with special ed than Mr. Nyland? If yes, what specifically did they do to improve special ed for Seattle families?

I'm truly curious.
Anonymous said…
I'm seriously disappointed with Rick Burke's position here, but based on his SBAC testing flip flop response at the demo forum, it's not out of character. He seems afraid to say "I don't know enough to answer the question" and instead tries to stay middle of the road.

Rick you have really stepped in the dodo on this one or you're underestimating the importance of the SPED community in this years election.

Anyway the damage is done. Thanks CT for flushing him out for us.

Anonymous said…

I can't think of one initiative any of the last 5 superintendents has done for SPS.
People like to think the superintendent gets levies passed, that's a myth in Seattle. I really can't understand why we have the position, its been a waste of millions of dollars.

What exactly do you think Nyland has done? The board for one did not follow policy and insure that the district followed all city, state and federal laws. The IDEA is a federal law duplicated in many RCWs. OSPI found more than one thousand violations of the IDEA and RCWs during it's audit.

So the answer is, both the board and Nyland have been equally impotent in getting this district to follow the law and therefore they both have done nothing for special education improvement.

The last thing we need is softy coming on the board thinking everything is wonderful.

Sped parent

I think Burke may be trying to sound reasonable with people he may be working with in the future. He might be a little to moderate in his remarks but that may be for a good reason. As well, giving Nyland a 7 out of 10 isn't exactly a ringing endorsement.

Anonymous said…
Reported at Wallyhood, Rick Burke said:

I have also been pleased with improvements in special education and his candid handling of recent district mis-steps, such as the response to the inadvertent release of over 7,500 student records containing personally identifiable information.

I am interested in what improvements in special education Mr. Burke saw.

Given that Nyland's predecessors did essentially nothing for years in regard to improving special education, I want to know what Rick Burke saw.

I was on the eventually 16 person State Board of Education's Math Advisory Panel along with Rick Burke, Supt. Larry Nyland (of Marysville) and Supt. Mike Riley (of Bellevue). The two superintendents contributed essentially nothing. Riley spoke little and Nyland less.

-- Dan Dempsey
Anonymous said…
So MW it sounds like you're saying Rick Burke will say what he thinks appeases other people, he will avoid conflict. I think we already have enough of those types on the board. Perhaps you should rethink your endorsement?

Sped parent
Anonymous said…
Has anybody seen Nyland at any community forum involving special needs families or advocates, since he was first introduced into the District? He is about the most distant and disinterested Supt I've seen. While he puts out his public relations blah blah about special education, the families he refuses to meet with and listen to are having so many difficulties. That anybody running for school board wouldn't know this and have a handle on it - whew, that is some glass bubble that person is living in.

Anonymous said…

That's the most asinine statement made by any of the candidates to date. It's even worst than that, because it wasn't an on the spot interview, he had plenty of time to craft his response. I also understand Jill Geery endorses Rick Burke as well as the incoming new special education PTSA president Cecilia McCormick. In all fairness they endorsed him before this information was released.

We now need to see if each will drop their endorsement of Rick Burke or try and explain away his position. Maybe Rick Burke can issue an official explanation to all the students and families exactly what he meant in writing;

"I have also been pleased with improvements in special education and his candid handling of recent district mis-steps, such as the response to the inadvertent release of over 7,500 student records containing personally identifiable information."

OR his other flippant remark ;

"Professionalism at District HQ: A key problem at SPS district headquarters is people dropping the ball and not following through and then switching jobs. The result has been a lack of professionalism, with budgetary and planning problems coupled with law suits and compliance failures. On the up side, some are saying the situation appears to be getting better as of late, particularly in special education."

Talk about an ill informed candidate! Rick Burke do yourself a favor and stop talking!

Vanilla Pudding
Anonymous said…
Everyone is being pretty tough on Rick Burke. Maybe he misspoke about special ed, but he is a sharp guy.

Do you want a better math curriculum for middle and high schools? He is the guy to get you there.

Keep it all in perspective.

S parent
Anonymous said…
Keep it, have you ANY idea what type of experience in SPS somebody has to have to be able to make those types of statements about special education? What isolation and narrowness -- not to have had a friend or a revelation or a son or daughter, to know first hand what they go through? Does he really have no link with any advocate or customer who could tell him another side of the story?

I think that there should be a minimum standard here. Next thing you know, he'll be saying ELL is going well and how great T&L is doing for kids whose first language isn't English.

NO to Burke
Anonymous said…
To be frank we don't need Rick Burke to get better math curriculum for middle and high schools, because it's in the works. Even if it's not, the negatives outweighs the positive with Rick Burke. Rick Burke can work as plain old Joe public on math adoption, but we can't have him in a position to stall real progress for special education or bring in his laissez faire attitude.

Look I'll be honest so its clear, I don't like a brown nosers. I don't like people that go to Michael DeBell parties, people that will say what they think might work to get them elected. He did not "mis spoke" it was a response he thought about and crafted purposely. Did you read his other long winded verbose answers on the blog? Those weren't off the cuff they were designed by an engineer for affect. Remember he said he TEST everything he makes.

He knew exactly what he was writing!

Vanilla Pudding
Lynn said…
"It's in the works but even if it's not..." You don't know what you're talking about. There is nothing in next year's budget for secondary school math curriculum.
Anonymous said…
It would be worth reading all the statements from both Mr. Burke and Ms. Gramer before taking a position. There are still many weeks until election.

I must say that see the special education program statements by Mr. Burke as a candidate for an unpaid position while being a fully employed person, husband and father of three are being blown out of proportion by some folks.

Take a break folks and ask him for clarification.

There is no "Perfect" candidate.

Is there anyone who could stand such scrutiny on every issue? Who would desire to run for school board?

Rick Burke thanks for running.

Please explain your position.

-- Dan Dempsey
I'll ask Burke about this but no, I am rethinking my endorsement of him.

Burke is NOT a Michael DeBell party person - far from it. Lauren McGuire? Yes.
Anonymous said…
Lynn darling, no one said it was happening this year. I read "in the works" as it's being discussed and strategies are being looked at. Do you really think one person alone will make it happen? I'm betting all candidates are brushing up on the SPED issues now. It's going to be a hot topic from now on. So thank Rick for that.

Greenwoody said…

Did you mean to say you are rethinking your endorsement of him - or are not rethinking it? I think you left the word "not" out before rethinking. ;)

I live in District 2 and have been planning to vote for Rick. I still intend to do exactly that. His answers on all the questions were miles better than Laura Gramer's, who does not appear to have even a basic understanding of SPS operations or the major issues.

I'm sure Rick will be along to clarify his views on Special Ed. I don't think he intended to imply that he thinks all is well with how it's being handled and managed. I've always gotten the impression from him that he puts a priority on being able to work with people, which is why he resisted taking a shot at Nyland, but also that he is also quite willing to hold them accountable and isn't in a mood to just roll over for the district staff, unlike some candidates (Lauren McGuire) and some board members (Marty McLaren).
Carr, Martin-Morris, DeBell and Maier love Lauren according to PDC. Nope, nope, nope and nope from me!
Anonymous said…
Greenwoody, so what do you think of PATU? She turned out ok and started out knowing very little. At least Ms. Gramer is not a robot. Rick will unfortunately always be questionable now in my mind.

He may be playing a numbers game and could think it's ok to marginalize SPED in favor of x? Someone said his wife is a big APP proponent and so that might play into it. There has always been tension between APP and SPED in many schools and on this blog.

Dennis said there was a huge issue with SPED services at North Beach when Rick was co-PTA president that resulted in several law suits and much chaos. Some inappropriate things were said and the PTA collapsed. So it doesn't seem likely Rick would want to start trouble with SPED again. I think Dennis and Ms. Gramer are acquaintances sharing similar SPED issues.

North Beach did have Saxon math(now gone), but that effort was not started by Rick. Rick and other parents kept the waiver alive for many years which was a good thing.

Like you said Rick is likely to go along to get along so it should be fun to see him and Harris go at it if they both make it on the board which I think is likely.

Show Time
Greenwoody, you got it right - I left out "not" as in "I am NOT rethinking my endorsement of him."

Laura Gramer is a kind, tenacious advocate but I don't think she knows the district as well as Rick and I'm not sure she's really running to win (but more likely, to bring awareness to deaf/hard of hearing issues and Sped). I'll ask her.

Show Time, you are just throwing a lot of "I heard", "someone said" - that's no basis to judge a candidate. So either you are throwing shade or just uninformed. And who is "Dennis?"

I did NOT say Burke was "going along to get along" - I said he was being pragmatic about people he may be working with very soon.

I find it amusing that Leslie Harris gets dinged as some kind of flamethrower but Burke gets dinged for being nuanced.
Anonymous said…
Lets all stop and let Rick explain his answers. I do find it telling that Mr. Burke chose to inject specialeducation in his answer. He was not asked about it. I agree he specifically did it for a reason.

July2nd Fireworks
Anonymous said…
"Burke is NOT a Michael DeBell party person" MW do ever fact check? Do you ever admit when you're wrong? When your talking to Rick go ahead and ask him if he attended parties thrown by DeBell, then come back and post the answer.

Bright light
GetThePicture said…
McGuire's campaign contributors:

Michael DeBell: $500
Sherry Carr: $250
Peter Maier: $750
Maier's wife: $750
Harium Martin Morris: $200
Greg Wong: $200

Will we see McGuire get large donations AFTER city-wide endorsements have been procured?
GetThePicture said…
Mr. Charter School- Reuven Carlyle- has endorsed McGuire.
Anonymous said…
We don't care about McGuire on this post, we are taking about Mr. Know it all.

Hey Rick
Anonymous said…
Aspirational unattainable unrealistic goals should not be policy.

That Board Resolution on SBAC testing contained the following:

Board Policy No. A01.00, Instructional Philosophy, states that, “The Board of Directors of Seattle Public Schools believes that every student can and must learn at grade level and beyond, and that all students will be afforded the opportunity to reach their potential and graduate from high school ready for college, career, and life. We recognize that in today’s global economy, college ready and career ready standards are the same and are appropriate for all students.

WOW!!! This is aspirational nonsense that apparently justifies "one size fits all" instructional objectives. I guess "Differentiated" instruction will solve any difficulty so all students will pass the SBAC at every grade level.

This is the same thinking that brought about NCLB's 100% of the students will be proficient by 2014 ..... and when this did not happen your state needs a waiver and your state will not get a waiver until you do what Arne Duncan wants.

Charlie Mas often states that the Board makes policy and should enforce policy through accountability. The following is policy nonsense:

We recognize that in today’s global economy, college ready and career ready standards are the same and are appropriate for all students.

This is thinking that is disconnected from the reality of human diversity and this kind of thinking is nearly perfect justification for all students passing every component of SBAC testing. (Are kids who can't pass SBAC defective? read A01.00 or is it the system that's defective? )

My wife taught students with multiple handicaps. A college friend is principal of a school for handicapped students and many of those students have multiple handicaps and are medically fragile.

News flash for Board members => Same standards are not appropriate for all students
and not all students can learn at grade level.

The Board needs to
#1 Change policy A01.00
or #2 enforce policy A01.00

Please note that SBAC testing seems perfectly aligned with this ridiculous policy.

Side note: So what has the Board done with stats like these

At Aki Kurose Middle School less than 55% of 7th grade students passed the MSP Reading test and less than 55% passed the MSP Math test. More than 1 in 4 7th grade students scored at the lowest math level "level 1"


-- Dan Dempsey
Someone said that this is a discussion of Rick Burke - no, this thread is about the School Board meeting.

I will try to contact Burke and ask him about his remarks but I stand my endorsement of him.

Also, DO NOT curse anyone at anytime on this blog. Ever.

I think we have covered Burke for now so only comments about the Board meeting and its agenda are allowed from here out.
Anonymous said…

As a parent of a special needs student who has struggled with services and attitudes in SPS, I am troubled by your blanket "I stand by my endorsement" statement about a guy who is completely out of touch with the realities of special education in this district. In fact, I think it is insulting.

I encourage you to modify your tone here. At least, change the status of your endorsement to "pending clarification". How could it not matter, what a person knows or doesn't know, or doesn't know he doesn't know, about the pain and suffering and exhaustion of families and the lack of citizenship of our students?

Reader, again, I said I would check with Burke but I have spend a lot of time with Rick (before he was a candidate).

There are only two people running in that particular race. I have had a couple of conversations with Laura Gramer who I know to be kind, smart and a tenacious advocate for deaf/hard of hearing. But I don't think she knows the district well and is certainly not as prepared as Burke to step up into being a Board director. Unless you want to start a write-in vote, there you have it.

I have found that if I believe a candidate is lacking in understanding, most do want to learn more and are happy to listen. I think this will be the case for Burke.

No one said it "doesn't matter" if a candidate doesn't know one issue well. I certainly never said that.

Again, this is not the thread for this discussion.
Anonymous said…
Rick Burke's wife spends time on this blog commenting and is well aware of the SPED issues(maybe they don't talk?). SPED issues affect nearly 10% of the students and certainly has been in the spotlight and exposed just how poorly SPS in managed. Rick Burke is no friend of SPED, he might understand other issues, but that's no guarantee he will be successful in whatever his agenda is.

I will pick the candidates with heart and mind over an insensitive robot willing to say whatever it takes.

Come on Rick what do you really think about SPED? I know what you used to think and I hope you have changed your mind for the better.

Hey Rick

So we are ending this thread because clearly people don't understand what it means to go off-topic.

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

Seattle Public Schools and Their Principals

COVID Issues Heating up for Seattle Public Schools