Seattle Times' Story on Hampson's Lawsuit
The Seattle Times has a story this morning on Seattle School Board director Chandra Hampson's continuing lawsuit against the district. The lawsuit is over an investigation that she and former director Zachary DeWolf had demanded that then-superintendent Denise Juneau launch. (Juneau thought it odd that they wanted to have themselves investigated but she did as they asked.)
When the investigation didn't go their way, DeWolf didn't run again (not saying that's why he didn't run but he did seem to like the job) and Hampson then filed a lawsuit. The Court's first ruling was to dismiss the case. Hampson is now appealing.
Hampson’s attorneys are seeking to overturn the finding that their client violated the district’s harassment, intimidation and bullying policy and say the district has not explained how events that led to the investigation meet the threshold of causing “substantial harm” to staffers under the policy. But attorneys representing SPS are arguing a thorough investigation was conducted, and that the outcome is supported by 20 witness interviews and thousands of documents.
So far SPS has spent $36,238.53 defending the case against Hampson, according to public records. District officials said that number will increase because the case is ongoing.
And fyi on that HIB (harassment, intimidation and bullying) policy for adults:
Last month, the school board voted to repeal the harassment, intimidation and bullying policy for adults (a student policy still exists) and replace it with civility procedures, citing the extraneous resources it took to go through complaints that often didn’t meet the threshold of the policy and prevented more serious complaints from being addressed. Hampson recused herself from voting.
The Times' piece states that just replacing the policy doesn't change the Court's decision.
There are a couple of quite volatile statements in the article from Hampson's attorney, Phil Talmadge.
“There’s been an issue on whether the staff of Seattle Public Schools runs the district or if the superintendent and board do,” said Hampson’s attorney, Philip Talmadge, a former Washington State Supreme Court justice. “This case highlights that particular problem and ultimately can bring affirmation to the board and the superintendent they hire.”
I can say this is the first time I have heard this argument for this case. Hampson thinks both the superintendent and the Board were somehow at odds with staff over governance at that time? I'm not sure that the members of the Board at that time OR Juneau would agree with that. At all.
Board members are elected to advise and approve policies, Talmadge said. If a superintendent or board member directed staff to get something done by a certain time and the employee refused to and claimed that was bullying, “I mean that’s just unworkable,” said Talmadge, who served as a state senator for 16 years. “As a former elected official, it’s bloody nonsense.”
Comments
Hampson is quite the piece of work. A raging narcissist and, as the report makes clear, a racist who harassed, intimidated, and bullied two Black women administrators.
Also, SPS eliminating the HIB policy in response is perhaps even more chilling than Hampson's own actions.
Stunned
Gift Horse
I think that Seattle is struggling with its image. A lot.
I think that Seattle has many parallels in its troubles with San Francisco and the City of Seattle does not want those comparisons to be made, especially not in news stories.
The district is a big deal if you want to attract and keep highly educated workers.
So, at all costs, avoid doing stories that would drag either the City's or the district's image down.
That's my take and I thought it interesting that your comment was along that line.
He's still working?