How is the Seattle School Board Changing? (Part Two)

The Executive Committee of the Seattle School Board meeting on May 25, 2022. The committee is made up of Board leadership - President Brandon Hersey, VP Chandra Hampson and Member-at-Large Lisa Rivera Smith. 

Ellie Wilson-Jones, Director of Policy and Board Relations, gave a presentation, 2022-2023 School Board Meeting Calendar, a fairly innocuous title. Let's unpack what is in it.

- The Board has adopted Student Outcomes Focused Goals and Guardrails and is working to implement the Student Outcomes Focused Governance model. This governance work is anticipated to include revisions to Board Policy No. 1240, Committees, to realign the standing committees of the Board and their charters. Therefore, it is expected that changes to the Board’s calendar will be needed during the 2022-23 school year. To support planning work for the fall, it is recommended that the Executive Committee move forward with setting a planned calendar for 2022-23 at this time and that the calendar later be revised in concert with the committee structure.

What this means is that because of SOFG (in this case the G is for Governance), the Board will "realign" the standing committees of Audit&Finance, Operations, Student Services, Curriculum&Instruction and the Executive Committee. And their charters which means that the work they do and what they oversee is going to change. 

- The attached 2022-23 calendar includes 11 meeting dates for work sessions. If the Board reduces the number of Board committees, it is anticipated that some scheduled committee dates could be utilized for additional work sessions.

Ah, so there may even be one less committee than before? 

- House Bill 1329, passed by the Legislature this year, revises the Open Public Meetings Act. The changes include provisions for holding meetings in a solely remote format under certain emergency situations and accompanying adjustments for noticing such meetings. The legislation also requires governing bodies of public agencies to provide an opportunity for public comment at or before every regular meeting at which final action is taken, except in emergency situations. The Seattle School Board already accepts public comment during each regular Board meeting and largely aligns with the requirements and suggestions for public access included in the new legislation meaning only minor revisions to Board policies are necessary to conform with the new state law.

But also,

The changes under House Bill 1329 will take effect concurrently with the June 1, 2022 termination of the Governor’s 20-28 series of proclamations, which have waived and amended provisions of the OPMA in response to COVID since March 2020. The expiration of the proclamation series means that the OPMA, as amended by HB 1329, now directly prescribes the format for holding and noticing Board meetings.

But Ms. Wilson-Jones is recommending (either through directors or her own work, I can't tell) the following changes based on WSSDA models (Washington State School Directors Association). 

1. Revising policy that includes removing the requirement that staff call each director to provide notice of a special meeting called less than seven days in advance, new language on holding and noticing remote meetings in emergency circumstances, and other revisions to better align with WSSDA’s model policy.

Why would they remove the notification from staff to directors? If directors only learn of  "a special meeting" say 48 hours before but are traveling, then that notice gives them little time to get back. Of course, this may be because Zoom meetings have become so prevalent but still, why take that out?

2. Proposed revisions to Board Policy No. 1420, Proposed Agendas & Consent Agenda, include removal of imprecise language regarding the consent agenda following minutes and extraneous language requiring and providing exceptions to the requirement that relevant supplementary information be posted to regular Board meeting agendas three days in advance. Policy language requiring that agendas, minutes, and Board Action Reports be posted in advance is retained.

First, I don't really care where the Consent Agenda moves to in the main agenda except if it were to be moved to the end of the meeting when most people would be gone. Given that this Board is moving more and more agenda items onto the Consent Agenda where they take one overriding vote for everything, it needs to be parked in the front half of Board meetings.

However, that "extraneous language requiring and providing exceptions to the requirement that relevant supplementary information be posted to regular Board meeting agendas three days in advance."

You might remember when the whole HIB investigation report came out, the Board did not discuss it at all, just took a vote to accept it. But they ALSO voted to bypass that requirement that any documentation that is part of a BAR has to be there three days before. This change means that whatever is in the BAR  (Board Action Report) is ALL that the public will see. You could always request that documentation but how fast would you get it? I couldn't tell you for sure. It took me a long time to get that report. 

3. Proposed revisions to Board Policy No. 1430, Audience Participation, include an exception to the requirement for public comment during regular Board meetings in emergency situations and added legal reference to RCW 28A.320.015, which provides for public comment during the Board policymaking process.

 Should there be public comment in an emergency situation? I would guess it would depend on timing. If there were an earthquake and the Board had an emergency meeting to, say, accept help from the City, then probably you don't need public comment. However, if it is an emergency like, say, COVID, and is long and ongoing, maybe the public should be able to weigh in. 

4. Proposed revisions to Board Procedure 1430BP, Audience Participation, include the exception for not holding public comment in emergency situations, added flexibility with respect to the assignment of student speakers during regular Board meetings, added flexibility to administer public hearings through an advance sign-up process, and other clarifications.

See that? A lot more screening and narrowing of public comment. 

A waiting list will be created if there are more speakers than speaking slots. The wait list will be ordered chronologically.

Why would they change the wait list order? 

What next?

The Executive Committee may also wish to consider broader changes to Board Procedure 1430BP, Audience Participation, which includes a complex process for the public to sign up for public testimony and staff to order and administer the testimony list. For the 2021-22 school year, the Board Office shifted to a largely online sign-up process for testimony, but the existing procedure still requires numerous manual steps to compile, prioritize, and repeatedly update sign-up lists. The Executive Committee is requested to make recommendations on whether some or all elements of the prioritization process can be removed and, at a practice level, whether phone sign-ups should be discontinued.

The prioritization process only impacted which speakers were placed on the testimony list, as opposed to the wait list, for two regular Board meetings during the 2021-22 school year. The number of phone sign-ups varies by meeting but is often one or two speakers.

I can see how listening to all those phone calls for sign-ups can be tedious. But ending phone sign-ups means cutting off many who do not use/have access to computers. You know, like some of those furthest from educational justice. 

Four Board members shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. Two Board members shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business at a committee meeting. Board members are not required to be physically present to participate in a Board or committee meeting and count toward the quorum requirements. Any or all Board members may attend a Board or committee meeting and vote via a communication platform – including teleconference – that provides, at a minimum, simultaneous aural communication between those present.

All votes on motions and resolutions shall be by oral roll call vote except for a vote on the consent agenda, which shall be by “voice” vote. 

So there's a big COVID change - Board members don't have to physically go to Board meetings. I think all of us have been in Zoom meetings which people awkwardly try to talk after one person stops talking. There is something to be said for all 7 members of the Board seated at the dais. It sure makes it easier to ignore speakers who come in person to look members in the eye. 

If the Board wants to do this, then I think there should be a limit to not being physically present at one Board  meeting or committee meeting a month unless the person is ill or disabled. 

None of this was discussed at this week's Executive Committee meeting so it's unclear when it might be enacted and the rest of the Board has to vote on changing any policy.

I've said in years past that the Board and the district will keep school communities and the public on a "need to know basis." They'll tell you what they think you need to know when they want you to know it. With these changes, it's hard not to miss how the majority of the Board want to control the narrative at all costs.