Seattle School Board Rushes To Get Items Done Before New Board Members Come In

 It can't be a surprise to anyone that Director Chandra Hampson is frantically trying to get several key items (some might call them pet projects) done before her time on the Board (thankfully) ends. 

I note that the induction ceremony for the new members is scheduled for Wednesday, November 29, from 5:30-6:30 pm. But what is curious is the Board is not following its basic every two week board meeting schedule. For some reason, they are going 3 weeks in October and 3 weeks in December. 

There should be a Board meeting immediately after the oath of office; this indeed HAS happened in the past. I'm not going for any "holiday" reasoning. I find this troubling because it certainly heads off the new Board. They will have one Board meeting with the new members on Wednesday, December 13th and then, I hope, have a Board meeting on January 3rd but I suspect that, too, will get pushed out to the next week. 

It certainly gives the powers that be on the Board more time. I sure hope the minority group will say no to any rushed items. It doesn't matter if that changes nothing; it puts it in the public record that some members stood up to be counted. 

Another curious item from reader Concerned:

Related to the past and future school boards, it is curious that the current board has held two executive sessions focused on review of a public employee in the last month: September 13 and October 11. The board manages one public employee-- the superintendent-- so one might conclude that they are reviewing the superintendent. Since historically it has been in the Nov/Dec time period when a superintendent's contract has either been terminated or extended, it seems like something is in the works.

Indeed there are rumors that a contract renewal is in the works. This fits with this current school board's penchant for slipping in significant decisions before they turn the lights out on their board service.

- Concerned

Now, the Board does get asked about employees other than the Superintendent when there are legal issues involved and that may very well be the case. 

And historically, the contracts go from July to July. Again, for whatever reason, Superintendent Brent Jones only has a 2-year contract that ends July 2024. Given that the current Board likes SOFG, I suspect they want to keep him in the fold so perhaps they ARE talking about his contract. 

I sure hope not.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Great. This is exactly what SPS needs, an expensive contract buy-out once stuff hits the fan over this incompetent reshuffle and then closures. Remember, this is a supe who was never publicly vetted for the job in the first place after President Hersey’s reversal on his promise to do so. If they ram a contract renewal through again next month, Hersey should face a recall campaign. That’s the reshuffle we need. This seems like something the Seattle Times could ask Superintendent Jones about directly.

Reshuffle Shuffle
10/20/23, 6:50 AM
Anonymous said…
I appreciate my concerns being elevated to this thread. A few thoughts:

Contracts do go July to July, but history has decisions being made in the Oct-Dec time period:
Denise Juneau's non-renewal/resignation happened in early December 2020
Larry Nyland's non-renewal was raised in October 2017.

I doesn't make administrative sense to run out the clock too long given how long it takes to find a superintendent, unless there is a secret plan to elevate someone already within SPS, which is equally concerning.

And I imagine there could be someone else to talk about, but 2 executive sessions?

If this were CSI episode, we might put to pieces together this way: 2 executive sessions + this school board (with zero track record of good decisions ) + HQ chatter = high likelihood that a superintendent contract renewal is in the works.

- Concerned
10/20/23, 8:36 AM
Melissa Westbrook said…
If this turns out to be true - with no public notice or input - no one should vote for anyone on the current Board.
10/21/23, 3:32 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

The speaker list is up for the Board meeting tomorrow; not as packed as I thought with just four people on the waitlist. The majority of the speakers are speaking on high school boundaries (with several wanting to talk about Ballard High). There are only three of us speaking about the Green Dot resolution asking the City to not grant the zoning departures that Green Dot has requested.  It's me, long-time watchdog, Chris Jackins, and the head of the Washington State Charter Schools Association, Patrick D'Amelio.  (I knew Mr. D'Amelio when he headed the Alliance for Education and Big Brothers and Big Sisters; he's a stand-up guy.)
Read more

Breaking It Down: Where the District Might Close Schools

Update 2: an absolutely fabulous interactive map made by parent Beth Day (@thebethocracy on Twitter - she covers Board meetings and is fun to read).   end of update    Update 1: Mea culpa, I did indeed get Decatur and Thornton Creek mixed up. Thanks to all for the correction. end of update   I suspect some who read this post will be irate. Why do this? Because the district seems very hellbent on this effort with no oversight skid marks from the Board.    To clearly state - I do not believe that closing 20 schools is a good idea. I think they hit on 20 because they thought it might bring in the most savings. But the jury is still out on the savings because the district has not shown its work nor its data. I suspect closing schools and THEN leasing/renting them is the big plan but that means the district really has to keep the buildings up.   But this district, with its happy talk about "well-resourced schools" is NOT acknowledging the pain and yes, grief, that is to come fro
Read more

MEETING CANCELED - Hey Kids, A Meeting with Three(!) Seattle Schools Board Directors

 Update 2: So I have seen a message from President Liza Rankin on why she, Director Evan Briggs, and Director Michelle Sarju backed out of this meeting.  In a nutshell: - She says there was no organization to the meeting which is just not true. They had a moderator lined up and naturally the board members could have set parameters for what to discuss, length of meeting, etc. All that was fleshed out. - She also claimed that if the meeting was PTA sponsored, they needed to have liability insurance to use the school space. Hello? PTAs use school space all the time and know they have to have this insurance.  - She seems to be worried about the Open Public Meetings law. Look, if she has a meeting in a school building on a non-personnel topic, it should be an open meeting. It appears that Rankin is trying, over and over, to narrow the window of access that parents have to Board members. She even says in her message - "...with decisions made in public." Hmmm - She also says that th
Read more