Two Upcoming School Board Candidate Discussions

Update: Gitenstein and Carlsen are having yet another discussion. 

Oct. 22nd, Sunday, 1pm, Youngstown Cultural Art Center
Moderator: TBA

end of update

Candidate Ben Gitenstein (D3) and Candidate Debbie Carlsen (D6) have joined forces to hold not one but two community discussions about school closures. 

The first discussion is Wednesday, October 18th at the Garfield Community Center starting at 6 pm, with doors opening at 5:45 pm. RSVP @ futuretownhall@gmail.com

The moderator will be Andrew Ashiofu. Mr. Ashiofu is a former City Council candidate in D3 and social  activist.

The second discussion will be Wednesday, October 25th at the Green Lake Community Center starting at 6 pm with doors opening at 5:45 pm. RSVP @ futuretownhall@gmail.com.

The moderator will be Sandeep Kaushik. Mr. Kaushik is a political and public affairs consultant.

Both forums appear to be in-person so do try to get out and talk to candidates in person.  

Learn more about Debbie Carlsen at www.debbie4seattleschools.org.

Learn more about Ben Gitenstein at www.wedeservebetterschools.org.

Comments

Melissa Westbrook said…
I watched part of the Seattle/KC League of Women Voters forum (I was having issues with my computer). I'll try to watch the rest. All the candidates were there but Maryanne Wood (D6). A few interesting items:

- All candidates were asked the same questions and had the questions in advance. Given they had a minute to answer, that seems fair.

- Liza Rankin said she wanted to see "positive progress" in SPS. Apparently she missed the latest word on how the Black Male Initiative is going.

- Gina Topp said she looked forward to being "a team player." In the current state of the Board, I would ask, "Which team?"

- The first question was about SOFG. Lisa Rivera Smith tried to hedge, saying she did support it but pushed back when Hampson tried to say no policy work until it was fully implemented. This is true. But Rivera Smith also said the work should reflect "community values" when she knows full well there has been no real community engagement on it. She said that the Board still had oversight over enrollment and bell times.

Christina Posten said she wasn't sure but she felt that SOFG was not even well-known to staff who will be working within it.

Gina Topp said, after talking to the public, "no on really cares how SPS is governed, they want a Board that operates well." She went on to say that a study on the Board said they needed clarity (sure, but that study said nothing about SOFG). She said it places "vision on the Board and gives the Superintendent "more discretion." Or power. She could have said power. She said her two concerns were 1) finding a good way to make policy and 2) a clear understanding of place for community engagement.

Debbie Carlsen also said community engagement was important and there was "inaccessible language in the guardrails."

Liza Rankin said it was still in process and transitional. She mentioned something about "well-established researched facts" that I didn't understand. She said previously that there was "confrontational governance." I do not agree at all.

Evan Briggs said the "hugest" pros were it was the first time that they were evaluating the superintendent based on student outcomes and time use for the Board. Superintendents HAVE been previously evaluated and just because the wording didn't state "student outcomes" doesn't mean previous Board didn't do their jobs.

Ben Gitenstein said there does need to be an operating model for boards but the outcomes currently are not good enough.
10/17/23, 2:30 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, gr...
Read more

Education News Roundup

From the ever-amusing Washington Policy Center : Vouchers are Pell Grants for students under 18.  Vouchers are no different than Pell Grants or GI benefits, except the money goes to the families of students younger than age 18.  Except they are. Pell Grants were created to help needy students and that's not really the goal of the voucher program.  The Pell grant website does have a couple of great studies on why low-income students drop out before finishing their higher ed and what makes a difference.
Read more