Adams Elementary (And the Problem with SPS and Principals), Part Three

So what do I think about Superintendent Shuldiner's work around Adams Elementary? 

I was not at the Adams meeting, however a local blog, The Bulletin, did have coverage of it. All bold mine. Here's how they start:

The Seattle Times reported that the Rainier View PTSA “filed a May 2023 federal civil rights complaint, alleging harsh discipline policies and practices that fell disproportionately on Black and brown students.”

Speakers at the March 2024 board meeting said they had raised concerns about Jones with SPS administrators for years — but never got a response. One teacher said of Jones that “her personal ties with the district staff have made all her misconduct invisible, which led to injustices within the workplace.” 

On Monday at Adams, Jones claimed none of that was true. 

She did say a couple of things at that meeting:

- She can't talk about the past because of "personnel issues."

- She's extending a hand "to each and every family, teacher, and everyone a part of Adams." 

- "I'm fully reflective. I'm fully ready to move forward." 

Here's the thing - she sure doesn't sound like a person who learned anything. She could have absolutely said something like: 

"I realize the Rainier View ES family was not happy with me. I wish I could have addressed some issues differently but I have learned from the experience and I bring that new knowledge to the upcoming work here at Adams."

She doesn't have to say she's a bad person or a poor principal. She doesn't have to directly address what those issues were. But to brush that all off to the Adams community as if nothing happened was a big mistake on her part. Because no one likes their concerns brushed off, especially when the situation had escalated to The Seattle Times. 

Two things happened at that meeting that are noteworthy:

Though Jones’s supervisor from her time at Rainier View, Katrina Hunt, was at the meeting, she didn’t step forward to answer this question. 

Why not? Did Shuldiner know Hunt was Jones' supervisor? Because if he did know, he should have called her to the mic.

Finally, Chief of Staff Bev Redmond responded that SPS removed Jones from Rainier View as an “act of care” for Jones. 

Well, that's damning. Why was Jones' being protected and no one else at RVES? That reflects very poorly on SPS. Redmond said there was "confusion" at RVES. And who created that confusion? Hmmm. 

What did Shuldiner do at the meeting?

First, he showed up and stayed the entire time. Give some credit there. 

Second, he said this:

Ultimately, Shuldiner said that if he does not appoint Jones, he would put SPS at legal risk.

As I said previously, that is absolutely true. But, time and again, it feels like a cudgel that represented staff use - if you don't keep me on, I'll sue you. If you say one bad thing about me, I'll sue you. 

And, of course, there is a two-fold possibility specific to this situation.

1) It is likely the Shuldiner has put Jones on some kind of rubric for her work with specific markers or goals. She probably has to meet those in order to continue on in SPS. That is the fair treatment for this kind of situation. If she doesn't meet the goals, she can legally be exited. (I'm not a lawyer but that's my impression about how this works.)

2) It may also be true that perhaps Jones wants to go but she wants a payout before she leaves. So she accepts the appointment she gets but is NOT going to go with the program and if she is told to go, she'll sue for wrongful termination.

And, in the SPS way, they don't want to go to court so they will pay her to leave. 

The Board Meeting AFTER the Adams Elementary Meeting, April 22, 2026

After reading reports on the Adams ES meeting and watching the board meeting, what do I think?

Personnel matters are not the purview of the Board. But they will still hear from parents and staff if they are unhappy. They can be good listeners but how does that help?

One action they can take is an audit of Human Resources. My belief is (and I know I'm not alone) is that HR is the source of many internal problems at SPS, especially around investigations. I believe Shuldiner is aware of issues and he has stated he wants to take a look at it. 

He can't get to this work soon enough for me.

The Board could pressure the Superintendent to create some kind of on-the-record messaging around principal appointments. 

My main issue with Shuldiner's performance at the meeting is that he sure seemed to damage his early reputation with the public. How?

1) First and foremost, what was he thinking with his messaging that night? I think if he had something to say about the reactions of some of the Adams community at the meeting, he should have said it AT THE MEETING. 

He should have said to the parents, "It is disrespectful to keep interrupting. I ask you please to listen and, when it's your turn, we will listen without interruption." But he didn't. Perhaps, upon reflection after the meeting, he felt he should say something.

But he waited until a televised public meeting to chide those parents. He said Adams was the "7th richest school" without saying what data he was using to say that. Was it PTA fundraising or what? And how is that important to the issue at hand? 

Parents complained about how slowly Jones spoke. I have not heard Principal Jones speak in person so maybe her cadence is different from others. I haven't seen footage of the meeting but there is a video on YouTube and she seems to speak at a normal pace. What was happening that night is unclear. 

But maybe the parents felt like she was talking down to them. You do tend to speak more slowly with children if you are trying to communicate something. But Shuldiner called it "a micro aggression" for parents to call it out. I don't see that at all and him following up by saying, "But who am I to judge?" was just passive aggressive. 

It feels like he went out of his way to somehow make this about privilege and race. 

I appreciate he wants to create a new way of meeting with parents about issues. But he didn't help his cause by undermining the parents' concerns. 

Another mistake? Calling head of Communications, Bev Redmond, to the mic. I would have been okay with with Redmond's first statement, "We are rooted in respecting and lifting each other up." But then, when she interjected her own feelings as a Black woman, it was wrong. ""No one should surrender their dignity and treated as less than human." 

There is some rich irony in this situation. 

1) I'm not sure it occurred to Shuldiner or Redmond that the very people that were not listened at the beginning of all of this were the parents and staff of Rainier View Elementary School who are mostly Black or brown. Those people stepped up to plead to the Board and then-superintendent Brent Jones to listen to what was happening at that school. 

In fact, there was at least one RVES parent who had expressed that the children's dignity was being hurt. And there's Redmond talking about Jones' dignity. 

2) Their pleas should be kept in mind for the Adams community. Shuldiner said at the Board meeting "give Jones a chance and suspend judgment." 

That ask is too much given the history. No matter how Shuldiner and SPS play it, the Adams parents - and anyone - can Google her name and see multiple stories about her performance at RVES. To ask parents to ignore it is to ask them to put their heads in the sand. 

I wish he had listened to President Topp when she said they had "a few minutes before public testimony" so he had time for his statement. 

Except he went on and on and violated one rule for Board meetings. That is, unless it's an emergency, no Board member or superintendent or senior staff can impact the start of public testimony. 

Parents and the public make an effort to come to a meeting to speak to the superintendent and the Board and that should be honored by starting on-time. It is disrespectful to the public's time when they have to come during rush hour and may have kids waiting at home for the start of public testimony to be postponed.

It should not happen again. 

At the Board meeting, there were two good parent statements.

Carrie Lynd, Adams PTA. Apologized to Shuldiner if he thought they were rude at the meeting. He said they should send him documentation and gave them his cell phone number. Quoted John Stanford when he said (basically) that SPS should not be more concerned with jobs than students.

But that is exactly the case here. 

Jones does deserve a chance because she might just succeed. But past history does not seem to indicate that happening. 

Parent 2: Rainier View had a 77% staff turnover during Jones' tenure. Don't want to "withstand" their principal.

So Brent Jones and Katrina Hunt (the ED for that region) could see RVES staff fleeing and knew parents were agitated and yet there's nothing in Principal Jones' file about any of it? 

"Withstand" is an interesting word to use and it brings up one final issue. 

As I said, I suspect Jones has been given a work plan with goals. If she is meeting the goals and yet Adams' staff start following what happened at RVES and leaving, will Shuldiner intervene? If parents see a big change in what happens in the classrooms and their children come home unhappy, will Shuldiner listen? 

In short, how long does Jones get at Adams ES if her style/decision-making hurts the school community? How long does that school "withstand" that?