What a Weird Board Meeting

 Update:

The meeting was late as President Gina Topp let people know their Executive Session would be done in 8 minutes (and that was almost on the nose). 

As I mentioned, Clark and Briggs were there virtually. I'm just going to say that unless it's illness or some emergency, directors need to be in those chairs. This is one of the few times when people can see directors in person and in action and maybe chat them up during breaks. Virtual is not and never will be a great substitute for in-person.  

Superintendent Fred Podesta was on the dais as well.

Topp started the meeting saying thank you to the public for taking the superintendent search survey and the deadline for that is August 4th.  

Again, she mentioned a community engagement meeting tomorrow, July 31st, at James Baldwin Elementary at 6 pm. I believe it will be Topp and Rankin. 

The first meeting of the new Ad Hoc Budget Committee is Thursday, August 7th. I don't have a time or place but will let you know. Committee meetings are open to public viewing. Director Clark will be the chair.

HYA rep Micah Ali went through a quick presentation. He said they were still in the "engage and recruitment phase with ongoing engagement."

He said they had started on May 29th with engagement with students and would go through until August 11th with the last session being for Native Americans. 

He stated that, using this input as well as that from the Board, they were creating a "leadership profile" and would be reviewing that with the Board on August 26th.

Then, from September 1 to the 15th, that profile would be shared with communities and that the application process for candidates closes on September 15th. He said there would be a final update to the Board on September 17th and a slate of candidates would be presented to the Board on September 26th. Then, the final candidates would be presented (not sure if this includes to the public) around October 9-10th. On October 13th, there would be Board discussion with a pick made between Oct 15-22nd and that is when the Board makes the offer to their pick.

Mr. Ali also noted how helpful and available that President Topp has been for HYA.  

Oddly, Director Liza Rankin said something like "you'll let us know if you need anything else from us?" Ali said yes. What was the purpose to that, I don't know.

 

Public Testimony

As I reported, there were issues with sign-ups. Topp mentioned a new form with the link at the top. I later learned that the reason I, along with others, was seeing the link as broken is because online sign-up stops at noon the day of the meeting. Okay, that's fine but showing the link as broken isn't telling folks the message about timing. I can't even imagine the thinking around showing a broken link instead of "online sign-up time has ended."

Director Sarju stated that she believed it was important to send out an email to families about this new process in many languages. She said, it shouldn't be "hard for folks to figure out." And she's right.

So there were just two people to speak. The first was a guy named Matt Burtness who said Sarju had told him it was okay for him to take extra time. Topp said nothing at this point.

Mr. Burtness is a teacher at Dunlap Elementary and helped found the Southeast Seattle Schools Fundraising Alliance which helps under-resourced PTSAs in that area. He has spoken out before at Board meetings in support of immigrant children and did so this time. 

But then he went off on a tangent about apologizing to Director Rankin for "weaponizing words" against her. He said that some candidates for the Board have gotten "negative words" for saying they wanted to work with Rankin. (The only person I heard specifically say they want to work with Rankin is Kathleen Smith in answer to a question about who she wants to work with on the Board.) He talked about needing "a sword and a shield" He had gone over his time but then remembered the moving of Interagency Academy and the BRIDGES program and attempted to continue but Topp said no. 

My comment in my first posting on this meeting about only three people knowing what he was talking about was this lack of specificity in who he was speaking about.  

The other speaker was long-time public education advocate Chris Jackins. He pointed out that people could sign up to speak at Board meetings on a sheet available at the meeting.  Re:Interagency, he said the law says there should be formal public hearings for any relocation of a school. He also said he hoped the new contract for the next superintendent would be for that person to be "fairly compensated." 

He also expressed faith in Superintendent Podesta but felt he may be "overloaded" with work. 

He also noted that all the items on the Action part of the agenda were Intro/Action (just as I did here).  

He mentioned the primary coming up and said people should vote for those who favor "no school closures." He pointed out that all the current Board voted for Superintendent Jones to look into school closures. 

end of public testimony

Action Items 

Topp briskly went through each item, a few questions were asked but everything passed. 

However on the relocation of Interagency and the BRIDGES program, Director Sarju expressed discomfort with the vagueness of Marni Campbell's answers around making sure both those programs got adequate building space with bathrooms. Campbell sought to reassure her but Sarju still wasn't happy. Sarju voted for it anyway.

Then, on the Action item to allow Topp to start negotiations with Podesta, Sarju requested that the meetings include another Board member and not just the president. Topp was fine with that. Sarju said "I don't get the Roberts Rules business" and could they just okay it or was an amendment to the item needed.  She suggested VP Briggs and then said she hadn't even asked Briggs. From virtual world, Briggs said it was fine. 

Then it was time for the Rankin speech of the night. I'm presenting nearly all of it - verbatim. If it sounds vague, it's because she WAS vague. I have no idea why she couldn't just bluntly say what she means. It would have saved a lot of time.

What I want to make sure we address are our expectations for Mr. Podesta. It’s not like things are going super swimmingly and he can just sorta be a caretaker until somebody new steps in. There are some things that we have to make sure happen regardless of interim or permanent.

My notes are just stating what I believe I heard from the community and am continuing to hear (about priorities). We already have adopted our Goals and Guardrails and evaluate the effectiveness of our system in aligning with what we’ve said. We have no (and she turns to Topp and laughs)... 

I would like to make sure that for the progress that we were elected to provide and progress that we have made as a district. The best potential we have to set up a new superintendent for success; we need to do some plumbing and wiring checks and take a look at the foundation. And those are things that can and should happen now. We shouldn’t say we will wait for the next superintendent, we, we, to be quite frank have squandered time over last few years. “Will they, won’t they do these things?” Problems that need to be solved. We have some serious things we need to do and we are creating conditions for a new superintendent with a stable, transparent scenario so they can be successful. 

I've been doing reading and research and real transformational change of a school district from an audit in  December 2024 where we said things but didn’t follow through. 

She said she was talking about SOFG and she said it was “Kleenex to tissue for Board governance." We as a Board have to make a commitment to doing our job for real. We need to authorize and allow Mr. Podesta to make some big changes. With budget alignment and staffing, all kinds of things I can’t stomach not doing things we say we are going to do. 

Based on the real commitment to change - that has to happen - we need to get really serious about - if we don’t expect Fred (Podesta) to fix everything but we as a Board should provide direction about priorities but we need alignment about what kind of moves can and can’t happen. Our org chart makes no sense and doesn’t align. Audits not implemented.

I’m expecting maybe Jan for new super plus a long period of transition.  What we as a Board are going to commit to doing over the next school year.

She stated they are legally required to evaluate the super annually and adopt an evaluation instrument.
She brings up Legal Counsel Greg Narver who says their office has been talking about these issues. 
He said they should take it up with outside counsel being used on superintendent contract.

Director Joe Mizrahi mentioned that the new Ad Hoc Budget Committee might be able to help and she said, "Maybe." 

This motion passed. 

Rankin sounds like someone who wants to be superintendent and I say this because the Board doesn't figure out the work plan for the district. The Board sets priorities ("goals and guardrails") and makes sure there are policies in place for the work AND the superintendent and staff figure out how to enact them. Can the Board rank priorities for work? Sure. 

It almost sounds like she's trying to push some stuff through BEFORE the new superintendent can get in (and maybe even the new Board). She sounds more than a bit frantic. I suspect what she wants is to start a school closure push but I think that will be a non-starter even for Sarju and Hersey. 

 

Strategic Plan presentation

Podesta promised to make the presentation succinct. He said that he wanted the draft to become the road map for the next superintendent.  He had "Junior" - Eric Guerci -  who is someone's deputy chief of staff next to him along with Chief of Staff/Communications head, Bev Redmond. 

One big item that was completely glossed over is that there is a consultant group - ERS - that is doing  this work on the new strategic plan. Again, how much is THAT costing?  

The  Representative Stakeholder Advisory taskforce has been convened. One slide said the work in this fall time period is:

- Prioritize

- Convene taskforce and conducted (sic) any additional engagement

- Develop guiding theory of action to achieve goals

- Determine specific actions for central office, schools, and classrooms

-  Make tradeoffs to invest in strategies and initiatives

What ERS found:

- Educator distribution across the district may create varied student experiences

- Variation in student course access and performance

- Inconsistent and/or undefined expectations and accountability for how school leaders utilize their autonomy to drive instructional improvement

- Unsustainable operating and staffing model given current fiscal deficit conditions

- Challenges with strategy implementation driven by organizational incoherence and lack of clarity of ownership.

Know something? I've heard this for decades. 

There are a couple of slides in this presentation about Black and Hispanic students enrolling less often in advanced courses (AP and IB) than other student groups. There was this odd sentence that I didn't understand. 

Enrollment disparities are present before students reach AP and IB coursework. E.g., taking Algebra I in middle school sets students up for AP Calculus - but Black and Hispanic students take middle school Algebra I more often than other groups. 

Can someone decipher this for me? 

And then, Director Sarju jumped in. She said she had "a little frustration" but "not hotter than fish grease." She said it was a good presentation and there were "no lies or falsehoods here." She then said her comments were "not meant to demean." Uh oh.

But she said that a Board quorum of four, earlier in the spring, "believed it was okay to fail" a high number of Black boys and she was mad (hotter than fish grease). She said it certainly wouldn't be a standard in the white community. (I wish she had named the Board meeting. I think there is more context to that vote.)

She said AP and IB starts "in third grade or earlier." She said "this Board is saying it's okay to fail that many Black boys "#NotOurFault."

She claimed it wouldn't be this bad if they had followed the Strategic Plan in place. She wanted to know if there was "a will and way" to implement a new strategic plan. 

As she has done consistently from the start of the year, she referenced how may more Board meetings she has until she is done as a Board member. 

Rankin then said something about Board members listening in on the taskforce meetings but not voting and questioned the makeup of the members. 

She then said that there are four seats up on the Board and that "individuals come and go but the direction of the Board should be sustaining and consistent." Sarju, next to her, nodded.

She said her concern was "that we can look back on this moment as a turning point."

She continued, "Also, like Michelle, I'm excited about this presentation, this feels like real progress. Those of us who have children in the system and have been advocates for a long time don't see these as 'emerging issues,' we know." She said that it was validating to have outside people (ERS?) say these things. 

I am excited - I'm not going to say my 'biggest fear' because that's a bit dramatic but I hope, desperately, that we can look back on this moment the real turning point for Seattle Public Schools" and that this is not just another taskforce. "Then a new Board got elected and it was trashed and everything changed. Cuz that has happened so many times. So what I was going to add to that is that Michelle was talking about strategic plans sitting on the shelf, they do that if there is no accountability. And that is our job as a Board. 

And so for everyone on the Board and hoping to be on the Board, if you are not excited by this and not willing to hold people accountable, (shakes head) step aside. Don't run. Cuz this is the work.  

Podesta said, "Leadership stability has been an issue that has been raised but um, I think I'm the longest serving member of the cabinet and the Board has completely turned over in my time in Seattle Public Schools. The underlying goals that you all have articulated working with the community have not changed that much." 

I think this is a discussion about how we are doing things, not what. (And Rankin tried to talk over him but he went on.) We can't get distracted and that seems to me to be the key. It can be done.  

Analysis

It feels like a push from Rankin and Sarju to try to shake things up but I think it's a little late now for where this district sits now. 

I think Podesta is wise in saying they DO know what needs to get done but it's the action plan that's needed. 

Rankin helped put Jones in but then drove him out in her quest for "accountability." How's that working out?  

And for Rankin to tell others not to run? Oh really? And to say new Board members shouldn't rush into change things? What the hell did she and Chandra Hampson do but flip the table? Absolutely true. 

Oh Pot, it's the Kettle calling. 

 end of update

 

 I'm a little tired right now so this will just be the teaser.

Tonight's Board meeting featured:

- Only two people for public testimony (so my complaint about the new system seemed to be true - you're going to love the explanation for why the link to the sign-up form doesn't work.)

- One person said stuff that only three people in Seattle could have known what he meant including a big apology to Director Liza Rankin for "weaponizing words" and how she really is the greatest. 

- There were just four directors in attendance; Gina Topp, Michelle Sarju, Liza Rankin and Joe Mizrahi. Sarah Clark and Evan Briggs were there virtually and apparently Director Brandon Hersey was unavailable. Clark continues her record of not being in the room for Board meetings. Not good. 

I did see from the angle in one shot of the room that candidate Janis White was there. If anyone knows another candidate who attended, let us know. 

- There's some community engagement meeting tomorrow, July 31st, at James Baldwin Elementary at   

6 pm. I believe it will be Topp and Rankin. 

- HYA gave a superintendent search update with a timeline. They still have the end of September as the date the Board picks. Hmm

-  Director Sarju made an interesting request - she asked for a second Board member to sit in with HYA the Podesta negotiations when a meeting happens. President Topp had no problem with that and Director Briggs was asked to be that person. 

- In her own babbling way, Director Rankin issued something of a throwdown in these last months for this Board. I think she's frantically trying to nail down some "Board work" before new people come in. It's a bit late for that. 

Details to come.

P.S. Do NOT send me comments that are anonymous. How many times do I have to say - give yourself any name or moniker. I will not publish anonymous comments. Someone sent in three tonight. Not going to happen.