Take a Look at Next Week's Seattle School Board Agenda

 As usual, when I go to the district website to look at one thing, I find something else interesting.

As I mentioned in a previous post, the district has not seen fit to acknowledge and celebrate the achievements of high school musicians and athletes from Garfield and Roosevelt as well as Lincoln, either at their website or on Twitter. So I went to look at the agenda for the School Board meeting, next Wednesday, June 7th to see if there might be a mention. 

And look what I found under the "Personnel Report." 

First, we already knew that Keisha Scarlett, the Chief Academic Officer, was leaving. She finally got a superintendent gig. (And I wonder if they will replace her any time soon, given the district's financial woes.)

Then I see the head of Early Learning, Heather Brown, is leaving (although not until October which seems odd). As well, the Early Learning Coordinator, Mary Fickes, is leaving September 1.

But then I see James Bush, Executive Director for the office of Partnerships and Engagments is leaving September 1. He's a pretty well-thought of guy so I'm surprised. A senior administrator in the same office is also leaving. 

Then there's Adam Haizlip, the Manager for the Office of African American Male Achievement program. He's leaving. 

In the Department of Racial Equity Advancement, Madelin Hall, program manager, is leaving as well as another senior administrator in that department. 

I don't know if these separations are part of the cost-cutting at JSCEE but that's a fairly big hit to race and equity personnel.

There's also one Executive Director of Schools leaving, Annaliese Hopkins. 

The principal at John Muir Elementary, Alana Haider, as is the principal at Emerson Elementary, Erin Rasmussen. The principal at Hawthorne Elementary, Sandra Scott, is also exiting.

Also at this meeting:

- Ending the joint operating agreement with Technology Access Foundation. It's a pretty sad thing, given how little time it lasted. The reason from one section of that agreement is "no longer feasible or desirable." I'll say what I believe about this agreement as well as the teachers contract - I think the district full-well knew they could not sustain this kind of spending. 

- The Board is enshrining changes to major chunks of policies. I find the wording in the policy on their relationship with the Superintendent to be interesting:

The successful operation of schools requires a close, effective working
relationship between the Board and the Superintendent. The relationship must
be one of mutual respect, trust, goodwill and candor. As the legally designated
governing body, the Board retains final authority within the district. The
Superintendent is the Board’s professional advisor to whom the Board delegates
executive and administrative responsibility.

To clarify their relationship, the following principles are adopted:

Board Policy No. 1620 Page 2 of 3
1. The Board of Directors and Superintendent together form the governance
team of Seattle Public Schools. Both must do their jobs well for the organization to be successful and for the governance team as a whole to be effective.
2. The Superintendent will be directly responsible to the Board for the administration of the school district. The Board will vest the Superintendent with executive authority commensurate with that responsibility.
3. Individual Board members will not hold the Superintendent accountable for meeting expectations that do not have the endorsement of the Board.
4. Except for issues involving the Superintendent as an employee, or in exceptional circumstances where the Board deems unilateral action is warranted, the Board will address personnel issues after consultation and upon recommendation by the Superintendent, and will issue all orders affecting employees through the Superintendent.
5. The Board will expect from the Superintendent recommendations for the improvement of the school district. The Board will adopt or revise policies after consulting with the Superintendent.
6. Since the strength of public policy is derived from diverse and sometimes contradictory views of the policymakers, Board members will freely and openly express their views on all items before the Board. However, all members of the Board will also seek ways to reconcile their diversity in order to provide clear direction to the Superintendent and staff.

I'm wondering if #3 means that individual Board members cannot openly say anything that troubles them at a Board meeting about the Superintendent's work. 

I find #5 to be troubling. The use of the word "will" in the second sentence almost makes it sound like whatever the Superintendent recommends, the Board "will" enact. 

Number six is somewhat confusing because of the use of the word "diversity"- perhaps it should be "diversity of thought" so that the more general use of diversity not confuse the issue. 

On the "Board-Superintendent Relationship Procedure," the Board COMPLETELY eliminates any "requesting of work of staff." What that extends to - is one question okay - is unclear:

Requesting Work of Staff: Any requests of staff involving significant staff
time must come from at least two Board members. All requests must be
made through the Superintendent or appropriate senior leadership. In the
spirit of collaboration, Board members are committed to be sensitive to
staff workload issues and to reach mutual agreement with senior staff
regarding due dates for requested work. The requesting Director shall
confer with the chair of the appropriate committee regarding requests. If
the chair and/or the Superintendent question the reasonableness of the
request, the Superintendent may ask the Executive Committee (or Board
President between committee meetings) to decide if the request should be
delayed or reduced in scope if it would have an adverse impact on the core
work and established priorities of the district. The Board President will
report to the Executive Committee when a decision is made between
committee meeting.

If a two-Board-member-request on an item that is already scheduled to go
before the Board for action is not recommended by staff, staff will
incorporate the request and the reasons they are not recommending it into
the alternative section of the Board action report presented to the full
Board. If a Director does not agree with staff’s analysis, he or she may
offer an amendment.

If a two-Board-member-request on an item that is not already scheduled
to go before the Board for action is not recommended by staff, the
appropriate cabinet member will write a memo to the Superintendent
explaining the staff’s recommendation. The Superintendent will then
address the request with the Executive Committee (or Board President if
between committee meetings).

Clarifications or explanations of agenda items are not considered a request for staff work.

As I previously reported, the district is putting out $1,250,000 to buy land near Rainier Beach High School to aid with the renovation of that school. I do not know if this is part of the stated cost to renovation, $276M.

The Board will also be announcing the new student board members. They did change the policy around these new members to allow for the number of qualified applicants that the Board wants. Could be 2 to 5 members. 

There is also an Intro item for the approval of the district's Highly Capable Program Plan. I have not had time to read it through yet.