Those Board Meetings? Always Worth a Listen
The agenda of the Seattle School Board meeting last Wednesday, June 3, didn't really look all that promising. But there were a few items that ended up being quite interesting.
Two Board members - Joe Mizrahi and Evan Briggs - came in after the meeting started.
Board reports included Director Vivian Song who explained that the proposals that the Board took to WSSDA were mostly rejected. She also mentioned - as chair of the Audit and Finance Committee - that they are working on the audit of HR. I can't wait to see how that turns out.
There were a scant 14 people on the Public Testimony list. One of them was former employee, Tracy Castro Gill. I was surprised to see her there as I thought she would never darken the doors of SPS again.She was fairly subdued and polite (in the past, she would generally glare at people when speaking). She explained that her group, Washington Ethnic Studies Now, had created, with others, an ethnic studies curriculum, She said that now the SPS Ethnic Studies director was gone and its program dismantled. (She oddly did not say that she was doing PD at several schools on ethnic studies. That would seem to be something the Board and the Superintendent might have wanted to know.)
She did mention a group, FAIR (Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism), that had "white scholars" creating "racist" curriculum. I will do a separate post on them.
One parent, Julie Letchner, spoke about her dismay that in middle school, her child was not being assigned books to read as part of the ELA curriculum. She mentioned the district is in year two of a 9-year contract for the curriculum. She said teachers are given near zero flexibility to use the curriculum as best suits their class.
There were several speakers, including former Board candidate Janis White as well as Pamela Phillips, who spoke about a philosophy for Special Education students with behavioral issues, Kids Do Well If They Can.
Phillips talked about "downstream spending" before "upstream help."
It sounds like an interesting concept.
The Board took a break after Public Testimony with President Gina Topp giving an exact time the Board meeting would resume. Even with that, there were two directors, Evan Briggs and Jen LaVallee, who were late getting back to the dais. Problem is, that Briggs is VP and Topp had to explain to Briggs where they were on the agenda since part of Briggs job is to read BAR explanations. (Briggs seems bored in the work and I hope she has a good challenger next election.)
Normally, the Consent Agenda is passed fairly easily. But a power that a single Board director has is the ability to pull something off of it to be discussed. Director Liza Rankin pulled 5 items from it.
No kidding. This has been going on for decades.
She went on citing “oversight theater.”
She also mentioned wanting "an annual report of all contracts - we could ask the superintendent. This is all fake and pretend."
Many Special Education advocates have wondered if these contracts ARE the best way to serve these students. Everyone, from directors to parents, are supposed to bow to what the district staff says is best.
Briggs thanked Rankin for her "encyclopedic knowledge", saying she was being sincere. "We don't get much training so it's hard to know when something gets placed in front of us."
Wow, what a thing to say. It's as if she couldn't do some exploration on her own without being guided by WSSDA or some other group. It's hard to believe she has been on the Board longer than Smith or LaVallee because they already ask great questions that indicate they did the homework.
Director Song thanked Rankin for previewing some of the work of the Audit and Finance Committee. She said they have scheduled a future meeting where Special Education staff will come in and give info on what they do and decisions that they make and "how that aligns with our budget."
And then the three items passed with just Rankin abstaining.
While it's great that Rankin spoke up, I remind readers that it was she and former director Chandra Hampson who are the ones who dismantled the committees. She claimed that she brought this issue up before. Maybe. But she also voted, over and over, for this spending.
Then they went on to the next items Rankin pulled which were one food contract and one BAR on kitchen fire safety items.
She came back in calmly but just as hot as before.
She said there was "value in checks and balances and spending in alignment with the budget but I don’t think this is the best way."
She says the previous Board did make recommendations in 2024 that were accepted by full Board on addressing the BAR issues but there was no follow-up. "What do we need to know when we are asked to approve things?"
Zing!
She said the process was "passive aggressive" towards the Board and the superintendent. She said it was, "Sabotage like weird alliances, cronyism, protectionism of adults and trying to bully the board into just signing off on everything."
Again, I have said this over and over. How many times has there been a "gotta get it done now" from staff and the Board passively accepts that? The Board doesn't question the nature of the spending? The Board accepts Capital Planning and Facilities telling them over and over about "no way to know" about cost overruns?
So good for her for speaking up but, at the same time, her efforts did help dismantle oversight by the Board.
Action Items
There were two items and one got way less attention than I thought it would.
The Board approved the new student reps for next year quickly and easily.
The other item was acceptance of a grant that the PTA at B.F. Day was able to get for the school. Principal Kristen Eckert came to the podium to plead the case. (It was noted that this is the first submission from a PTA that exceeds the threshold where Board approval is needed.)
Basically, the money would go towards what the principal called "meaningful differentiation" for all students in the school with extra supports for students that struggle with behavior issues. She spoke of those students as "disregulated." She said that she and staff had done observations at Gatewood ES where this is being tried.
She did say something interesting at the end about "wanting to serve all the students whose families choose to keep them right here in their neighborhood public schools."
I believe from her saying that - and hearing that Loyal Heights is losing 15 students to Cascadia ES - that finally there is now something to goad principals into doing more about differentiation than just lip service. Because now they are losing students because of it.
Rankin spoke up and again, with a bit of fire. She thanked Eckert and said that the principal had been open about their current student data on disregulated students. She said there is "a culture of fear" where schools don't want to show their student data.
And then there was no more discussion. I was surprised because of what was in the BAR that Rankin and Evans have spoke out about in the past. Namely, PTAs with fundraising firepower. Here's what the BAR says:
The B.F. Day PTSA originally provided a grant of $247,000 for the 2026-27 school year to support school staffing with 1.0 FTE interventionist and 0.5 FTE counselor, recess supervisors, and kindergarten kick-off.
Two Board members - Joe Mizrahi and Evan Briggs - came in after the meeting started.
Board reports included Director Vivian Song who explained that the proposals that the Board took to WSSDA were mostly rejected. She also mentioned - as chair of the Audit and Finance Committee - that they are working on the audit of HR. I can't wait to see how that turns out.
There were a scant 14 people on the Public Testimony list. One of them was former employee, Tracy Castro Gill. I was surprised to see her there as I thought she would never darken the doors of SPS again.She was fairly subdued and polite (in the past, she would generally glare at people when speaking). She explained that her group, Washington Ethnic Studies Now, had created, with others, an ethnic studies curriculum, She said that now the SPS Ethnic Studies director was gone and its program dismantled. (She oddly did not say that she was doing PD at several schools on ethnic studies. That would seem to be something the Board and the Superintendent might have wanted to know.)
She did mention a group, FAIR (Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism), that had "white scholars" creating "racist" curriculum. I will do a separate post on them.
One parent, Julie Letchner, spoke about her dismay that in middle school, her child was not being assigned books to read as part of the ELA curriculum. She mentioned the district is in year two of a 9-year contract for the curriculum. She said teachers are given near zero flexibility to use the curriculum as best suits their class.
There were several speakers, including former Board candidate Janis White as well as Pamela Phillips, who spoke about a philosophy for Special Education students with behavioral issues, Kids Do Well If They Can.
Child Expert Ross Greene wants adults to rethink the way they support children who struggle with their behavior. He offers two reasons children behave in unexpected ways:Lagging skillsUnsolved problemsGreene says about 80 percent of problem behaviors at school are due to academic struggles and the rest are related to social inadequacies. To help children make good choices and participate in their education, he says, adults need to collaborate with children to help them learn the skills they need and solve problems that are getting in the way.
Phillips talked about "downstream spending" before "upstream help."
It sounds like an interesting concept.
The Board took a break after Public Testimony with President Gina Topp giving an exact time the Board meeting would resume. Even with that, there were two directors, Evan Briggs and Jen LaVallee, who were late getting back to the dais. Problem is, that Briggs is VP and Topp had to explain to Briggs where they were on the agenda since part of Briggs job is to read BAR explanations. (Briggs seems bored in the work and I hope she has a good challenger next election.)
Normally, the Consent Agenda is passed fairly easily. But a power that a single Board director has is the ability to pull something off of it to be discussed. Director Liza Rankin pulled 5 items from it.
The revised Consent Agenda passed and they moved onto Rankin's explanation of why she did that. She pulled off three items related to Special Education and then launched into a long speech.
It was stunning in several ways. One, she said some things out loud that hardly ever get said; however, they are things I have personally written about for a very long time. Two, she really let staff have it and I'll bet they didn't see it coming. (She did not name names. She's too smart for that.) It is unclear to me if the other members of the Board knew this was coming. There wasn't a lot of discussion because time had already been allotted to other topics.
She stated that those first three were pulled off "for the same reason." She explained that the money was already spent on these items and yet the Board is supposed to rubber-stamp that decision.
It was stunning in several ways. One, she said some things out loud that hardly ever get said; however, they are things I have personally written about for a very long time. Two, she really let staff have it and I'll bet they didn't see it coming. (She did not name names. She's too smart for that.) It is unclear to me if the other members of the Board knew this was coming. There wasn't a lot of discussion because time had already been allotted to other topics.
She stated that those first three were pulled off "for the same reason." She explained that the money was already spent on these items and yet the Board is supposed to rubber-stamp that decision.
"The BAR process and our own policies have been used to control and coerce the Board and how we have given up our authority and taken also interfered with the superintendent’s authority. The superintendent should be able to determine whether or not entering into a certain contract is appropriate. We don’t know that. We’re not given the opportunity to discern that. We’re asked to approve this based on the monetary amount that is going over a certain amount.
We can’t vote no on it because that money has already been spent, those services have been provided.”
No kidding. This has been going on for decades.
She went on citing “oversight theater.”
"No state law that requires us to do this. We have a finance operations and policy committee now. The BAR process has been used to bully the Board.” Too late to talk about a thing to happen. It’s even too late for the Superintendent and he should be making the decisions for our 50K students.Students served on these three items are sent outside of the district. We don’t talk about is this the best thing, value or appropriateness of these services. I will abstain on all of these. We can ask for whatever information we want."
She also mentioned wanting "an annual report of all contracts - we could ask the superintendent. This is all fake and pretend."
Many Special Education advocates have wondered if these contracts ARE the best way to serve these students. Everyone, from directors to parents, are supposed to bow to what the district staff says is best.
Briggs thanked Rankin for her "encyclopedic knowledge", saying she was being sincere. "We don't get much training so it's hard to know when something gets placed in front of us."
Wow, what a thing to say. It's as if she couldn't do some exploration on her own without being guided by WSSDA or some other group. It's hard to believe she has been on the Board longer than Smith or LaVallee because they already ask great questions that indicate they did the homework.
Director Song thanked Rankin for previewing some of the work of the Audit and Finance Committee. She said they have scheduled a future meeting where Special Education staff will come in and give info on what they do and decisions that they make and "how that aligns with our budget."
And then the three items passed with just Rankin abstaining.
While it's great that Rankin spoke up, I remind readers that it was she and former director Chandra Hampson who are the ones who dismantled the committees. She claimed that she brought this issue up before. Maybe. But she also voted, over and over, for this spending.
Then they went on to the next items Rankin pulled which were one food contract and one BAR on kitchen fire safety items.
She came back in calmly but just as hot as before.
She said there was "value in checks and balances and spending in alignment with the budget but I don’t think this is the best way."
She says the previous Board did make recommendations in 2024 that were accepted by full Board on addressing the BAR issues but there was no follow-up. "What do we need to know when we are asked to approve things?"
"This system of SPS is taking advantage of the fact that we don’t want to look bad or have people mad at us, and we don’t know what we are doing. And that has been used against boards going on 30 years.
The way the BAR process works now it is so full of contempt for the BAR, honestly, and our community. We are here as reps for the community
And the passive aggressiveness - not saying any single person - because it is a system, (although, if you are a person taking personal offense at what I say that might be an admission and you should think about that.")
Zing!
"I see the new superintendent being sabotaged by the same crap, the virus of this system does to people. I have been punished greatly by this system - (Topp motions her to wrap it up)- trying to sustain itself that is really damaging."
She said the process was "passive aggressive" towards the Board and the superintendent. She said it was, "Sabotage like weird alliances, cronyism, protectionism of adults and trying to bully the board into just signing off on everything."
Again, I have said this over and over. How many times has there been a "gotta get it done now" from staff and the Board passively accepts that? The Board doesn't question the nature of the spending? The Board accepts Capital Planning and Facilities telling them over and over about "no way to know" about cost overruns?
So good for her for speaking up but, at the same time, her efforts did help dismantle oversight by the Board.
Action Items
There were two items and one got way less attention than I thought it would.
The Board approved the new student reps for next year quickly and easily.
The other item was acceptance of a grant that the PTA at B.F. Day was able to get for the school. Principal Kristen Eckert came to the podium to plead the case. (It was noted that this is the first submission from a PTA that exceeds the threshold where Board approval is needed.)
Basically, the money would go towards what the principal called "meaningful differentiation" for all students in the school with extra supports for students that struggle with behavior issues. She spoke of those students as "disregulated." She said that she and staff had done observations at Gatewood ES where this is being tried.
She did say something interesting at the end about "wanting to serve all the students whose families choose to keep them right here in their neighborhood public schools."
I believe from her saying that - and hearing that Loyal Heights is losing 15 students to Cascadia ES - that finally there is now something to goad principals into doing more about differentiation than just lip service. Because now they are losing students because of it.
Rankin spoke up and again, with a bit of fire. She thanked Eckert and said that the principal had been open about their current student data on disregulated students. She said there is "a culture of fear" where schools don't want to show their student data.
And then there was no more discussion. I was surprised because of what was in the BAR that Rankin and Evans have spoke out about in the past. Namely, PTAs with fundraising firepower. Here's what the BAR says:
The B.F. Day PTSA originally provided a grant of $247,000 for the 2026-27 school year to support school staffing with 1.0 FTE interventionist and 0.5 FTE counselor, recess supervisors, and kindergarten kick-off.
Additionally, the B.F. Day PTSA supports students with funding for the arts and special projects, bringing community arts organizations into the school to work with students, classroom supplies and materials, scholarships for field trips and fundraising for 5th Grade Camp at Naturebridge, money for community events and the materials to run them, and funds for library materials.
Can I just say that B.F. Day ES seems to have evolved from years past into a school with a very strong PTA. That's a LOT of money for an elementary school to raise. Their stats are 347 enrolled with students testing in the upper 80s. It is a largely white school with multiracial being the largest group of students of color at 14%. Their F/RL rate is nearly 19%.
Then,
The B.F. Day PTSA has additionally secured a grant through America’s Foundation that the B.F. Day PTSA proposes to use to support differentiation in the classroom. The additional grant of $92,500 would bring the total contributions from the PTSA to
$339,500 for the 2026-2027 school year.
The additional grant funds will be used to provide teachers with professional
development from Lives in the Balance (Ross Greene) and University of Washington’s Haring Center designed to help teachers meet the needs of neurodiverse students and students receiving special education and highly capable services. Teachers will also be provided with additional collaboration and planning time to support well-designed differentiation of curriculum. The grant will fund one tutor from Tutors in Public Schools (TIPS) to support this work, focusing on split grade classrooms.
Can I just say that B.F. Day ES seems to have evolved from years past into a school with a very strong PTA. That's a LOT of money for an elementary school to raise. Their stats are 347 enrolled with students testing in the upper 80s. It is a largely white school with multiracial being the largest group of students of color at 14%. Their F/RL rate is nearly 19%.
Then,
The B.F. Day PTSA has additionally secured a grant through America’s Foundation that the B.F. Day PTSA proposes to use to support differentiation in the classroom. The additional grant of $92,500 would bring the total contributions from the PTSA to
$339,500 for the 2026-2027 school year.
The additional grant funds will be used to provide teachers with professional
development from Lives in the Balance (Ross Greene) and University of Washington’s Haring Center designed to help teachers meet the needs of neurodiverse students and students receiving special education and highly capable services. Teachers will also be provided with additional collaboration and planning time to support well-designed differentiation of curriculum. The grant will fund one tutor from Tutors in Public Schools (TIPS) to support this work, focusing on split grade classrooms.
The funding through this grant is a one-time opportunity but is intended to build a strong foundation for future years.
And a tip of the hat to the parents who found this grant and wrote the grant. That's a big job.
But again, after hearing Rankin and Briggs in the past speak disparagingly of schools with PTAs with a lot of money, it's interesting they had nothing to say last Wednesday.
Introduction Items
The Board's first item was the partial rebuild of the John Marshall building near Green Lake that has been used as an interim site for schools having their own buildings rebuilt. But rather than modernize, they are building onto the building (or rather upwards - it's a three-story building). The BAR is a bit cagey with only the state dollars (at nearly $6.5M) mentioned. Clearly, it's going to cost a lot more.
I find that Capital Building and Facilities head, Richard Best, is increasingly moving towards building new which is a lot more costly than modernizing. I find it interesting that the Board never, ever asks about Capital costs.
The Board seems to think it is better to have students at an interim site than on-site than being on-site as building proceeds on a new building. However, many other districts do it on-site. As well, SPS did this for Rainier Beach HS and Nathan Hale HS.
But Song did mention that Whitman and Eckstein and JAMS really need updating and I would agree with an interim building for that work because middle school is such a short period in a student's academic career.
Then they went to a whole discussion that was basically - in whose house do different items belong? Is it the Board's house with policy or the Superintendent's house with procedures?
Shuldiner stated that this was now the third time staff is presenting this. He said as superintendent, he is trying -vis a vis with the Board - to figure out how to give the best service to the community.
He said that Singapore and England have the best public school systems but SPS doesn't have to be the best in the world but certainly could be in the U.S.
Song mentioned how much money chronically absent students are costing the district (and there are about 6,000 of them).
LaVallee mentioned she had gone on 40 of the school tours with him - good for her. She asked Shuldiner where he thought these policies and procedures should be and he said he defers to the Board.
Smith mentioned that multilingual students may not have enough of a push in academics and Shuldiner said it was a good point. She mentioned an equity framework in terms of where things live.
Rankin was still going when this came up. She stated that "focused governance" was around for a long time before SOFG and SOFG "was not implemented."
Really? The Board got rid of as many committees as they could. That's SOFG. Went to one Board meeting a month. That's SOFG. She wants to have some revisionist history and I tell her now - that dog won't hunt.
She said the Board has the ownership of goals and guardrails and "now we are delegating that to him." She said she wouldn't approve this as presented.
And again, they run out of time. The Board needs to have a work session - just for themselves - about this issue about who is responsible for what and then get on with it.
But Topp said they had to go into Executive Session. This being about:
To review the performance of a Public employee, RCW 42.30.110(1)(g); Request for reconsideration of transfer to subordinate certificated position, RCW 28A.405.230.
She said that it would take TWO AND A HALF HOUR and yes, a groan went up from the directors.
And a tip of the hat to the parents who found this grant and wrote the grant. That's a big job.
But again, after hearing Rankin and Briggs in the past speak disparagingly of schools with PTAs with a lot of money, it's interesting they had nothing to say last Wednesday.
Introduction Items
The Board's first item was the partial rebuild of the John Marshall building near Green Lake that has been used as an interim site for schools having their own buildings rebuilt. But rather than modernize, they are building onto the building (or rather upwards - it's a three-story building). The BAR is a bit cagey with only the state dollars (at nearly $6.5M) mentioned. Clearly, it's going to cost a lot more.
I find that Capital Building and Facilities head, Richard Best, is increasingly moving towards building new which is a lot more costly than modernizing. I find it interesting that the Board never, ever asks about Capital costs.
The Board seems to think it is better to have students at an interim site than on-site than being on-site as building proceeds on a new building. However, many other districts do it on-site. As well, SPS did this for Rainier Beach HS and Nathan Hale HS.
But Song did mention that Whitman and Eckstein and JAMS really need updating and I would agree with an interim building for that work because middle school is such a short period in a student's academic career.
Then they went to a whole discussion that was basically - in whose house do different items belong? Is it the Board's house with policy or the Superintendent's house with procedures?
Shuldiner stated that this was now the third time staff is presenting this. He said as superintendent, he is trying -vis a vis with the Board - to figure out how to give the best service to the community.
He said that Singapore and England have the best public school systems but SPS doesn't have to be the best in the world but certainly could be in the U.S.
Song mentioned how much money chronically absent students are costing the district (and there are about 6,000 of them).
LaVallee mentioned she had gone on 40 of the school tours with him - good for her. She asked Shuldiner where he thought these policies and procedures should be and he said he defers to the Board.
Smith mentioned that multilingual students may not have enough of a push in academics and Shuldiner said it was a good point. She mentioned an equity framework in terms of where things live.
Rankin was still going when this came up. She stated that "focused governance" was around for a long time before SOFG and SOFG "was not implemented."
Really? The Board got rid of as many committees as they could. That's SOFG. Went to one Board meeting a month. That's SOFG. She wants to have some revisionist history and I tell her now - that dog won't hunt.
She said the Board has the ownership of goals and guardrails and "now we are delegating that to him." She said she wouldn't approve this as presented.
And again, they run out of time. The Board needs to have a work session - just for themselves - about this issue about who is responsible for what and then get on with it.
But Topp said they had to go into Executive Session. This being about:
To review the performance of a Public employee, RCW 42.30.110(1)(g); Request for reconsideration of transfer to subordinate certificated position, RCW 28A.405.230.
She said that it would take TWO AND A HALF HOUR and yes, a groan went up from the directors.
Comments