Legalities of Closing Schools

Update:

I did leave out a detail in the Board policy that may come into play, given how hellbent the district is on finalizing the list of schools before the end of 2024.

In the event exigent circumstances make adherence to the above policy infeasible, the Board of Directors may so declare and make a school closure(s) decision following a process consistent only with the minimum requirements of RCW 28A.335.020.

In the original post, I did print the entire RCW and I don't see how they can cut much time from it.

However, I also just noticed that the RCW says: ...during the ninety days before a school district's final decision...

The Board policy says: ...The Board’s final decision shall be made within ninety (90) days of the time hearings are held for each proposed site for closure...

I am not a lawyer but as a writer, I know words - have - meaning. I'm not sure if "during" and "within" are different but I suspect the RCW will trump the Board policy. 

I also noticed this in the Board policy that has to be done:

These (hearing) notices shall be published once each week for two consecutive weeks, with the last notice to be published not less than seven (7) days before the hearings.

Meaning the hearings have to be advertised for two weeks with a week between the last notice and the first hearing. 

I know from past closures that many parents are passionate about being heard about their school. It would behoove the Board and the district to follow the legal process to a T. 

end of update

 

I know I have written about this before but I sat down and reread both the Washington State RCW and the Board policy on school closures. 

I'm writing about it because the Times has yet another story on the closures. I'm a little unclear on why they put this one out - there's no new information - but there are a couple of quotes that got me thinking.

School Board President Liza Rankin said she was also unclear on the district’s timeline. “The Board is also waiting for a clear timeline and proposal from the superintendent, as the public,” Rankin said Tuesday.

Hersey has said he wants a connection to student outcomes, transition plans, and a proposal that would not needlessly uproot thousands of students.  

The key words there are "timeline" and "proposal."

Here's the link to the RCW and here's the link to the Board policy.  I'll highlight key sections of each.

Below is the complete RCW:

Before any school closure, a school district board of directors shall adopt a policy regarding school closures which provides for citizen involvement before the school district board of directors considers the closure of any school for instructional purposes. 

 

The policy adopted shall include provisions for the development of a written summary containing an analysis as to the effects of the proposed school closure. The policy shall also include a requirement that during the ninety days before a school district's final decision upon any school closure, the school board of directors shall conduct hearings to receive testimony from the public on any issues related to the closure of any school for instructional purposes. The policy shall require separate hearings for each school which is proposed to be closed.

 

The policy adopted shall provide for reasonable notice to the residents affected by the proposed school closure. At a minimum, the notice of any hearing pertaining to a proposed school closure shall contain the date, time, place, and purpose of the hearing. Notice of each hearing shall be published once each week for two consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the area where the school, subject to closure, is located. The last notice of hearing shall be published not later than seven days immediately before the final hearing.

The proposal must put forth not only what the Board stated they wanted at the last Board meeting- how closing schools leads to better student outcomes - but also, within the Board policy on closures, it asks for that analysis to include specific elements which the recent proposal didn't have. Here they are:

1. Development and presentation of the Superintendent’s preliminary recommendation for school closure(s) and publication of analysis of possible effects of proposed school closure(s) to include:
1. Criteria for school closure(s) CHECK
   
2. Demographic and integration effects NOPE
   
3. Relationship of the proposed closure(s) to any on-going, established long-range program for facility use, NOPE
4. Proposed site classification NOPE

If they are talking about closing 20 schools, that is quite the volume of work. Because, unlike what is promised in school levies, there are likely NO takebacks for school closures. Meaning, whatever the district says for each building in that analysis had better be correct and true.

Plus the math doesn't really parse out for even the last timeline that the district put forth. It's unclear to me exactly how/why they thought they could get a vote within the framework of the RCW and Board policy. 

Here's how the timeline goes for both the RCW and Board policy:

First - Public review of the Superintendent’s preliminary recommendation for school closure(s) (minimum of thirty (30) days). (board policy)

 

Second, hearings for each school proposed to be closed (RCW and board policy).

 

90 day clock

The policy shall also include a requirement that during the ninety days before a school district's final decision upon any school closure, the school board of directors shall conduct hearings...

 

Now when that 90 days kicks in isn't quite clear to me. I would assume it means the Board introduced the final plan at a Board meeting. Kids, it's September 25th and they don't even HAVE a plan that the Board supports. Doing the math, 90 days from now, it's about Christmas so that clearly won't work. 

 

But let's say that the Superintendent and staff pull it together and present a revised plan at the next Board meeting which is October 9th. Let's say that the Board accepts the parameters of the plan and notes the addition of language around student outcomes. But, as I have pointed out, it must ALSO include all the information that the Board policy requires.  

 

So at that Board meeting, October 9th, the 90-day clock starts ticking. 

Since the district is not going to put their proposal out in time for the 90 days in this year, we look to 2025. 

Now, one thing it does not say - in either board policy or the RCW - is that the hearings have to be on their own night. So they could do three hearing in one night with some senior staffer there representing the Superintendent. 

 

But still, there has to be a 90 day window before the Board vote. That takes us to....Jan 7th. (I counted ALL days from October 9th, not just business days.)

 

That would be when the final vote happens. 

 

Now the Board policy also states this:

Public review of the Superintendent’s final recommendation for school closure(s) (minimum of fourteen (14) days).

Okay sure, but that's within the 90 day window. 

A key item here is that the Superintendent must ALSO have a separate hearing on the final proposal.

School Board Action on school closure(s). (The Board’s final decision shall be made within ninety (90) days of the time hearings are held for each proposed site for closure(s) (#3 above) and no less than seven (7) days after the public hearing on the Superintendent’s final recommendation for school closure(s).) 

 

So that Board vote on the final decision has to come a week after the Superintendent's hearing on the final proposal. 

A lot depends on when the Superintendent has a final plan to introduce to the Board that contains ALL the required elements. 

But it does not look like any vote could possibly take place in 2024. 

Thoughts?