This and That, July 25, 2026

Following up on the public meeting about the athletic field for Lincoln High School, a story from KOMO News:

Seattle Public Schools is pushing ahead with a plan to build a new athletic field for Lincoln High School in Lower Woodland Park, but the proposal is drawing backlash over the potential removal of dozens of trees.

Initial reports from arborists suggest approximately 80 trees would need to be cleared to build the field. Activists with Tree Action Seattle are trying to block the project, saying the trees help cool the surrounding area and remove air pollutants. 

Initial reports from arborists suggest approximately 80 trees would need to be cleared to build the field. Activists with Tree Action Seattle are trying to block the project, saying the trees help cool the surrounding area and remove air pollutants.

I have heard pro-field folks say these are not important trees as in specialty trees but yes, all trees contribute in an urban landscape.

They do get one thing wrong - Lincoln is currently the only high school in the district without a home field.

Lincoln is the only comprehensive high school - Nova and Center School do not have one.

Superintendent Ben Shuldiner wants to build the new field on an empty gravel lot at North 50th Street and Aurora Avenue North. The project would cost approximately $9.4 million. 

Superintendent Schuldiner points out that the school has grown from 650 students to about 1800 and I feel certain in saying that likely makes it the biggest high school in SPS.

“We have at least 80 percent of our students involved in some sort of extra-curricular activity and without having that accessible field and accessible outdoor space right by our school, what it leads to is our students going above and beyond to be involved in their passion areas. This turns into athletic practices and other activities happening way late in the evening from 7 to 9pm. You know I'll be at the school and I'll regularly see 3 or 4 buses coming back every single night.” 

The Seattle Parks Commission could vote on the proposal at its meeting on August 13. Seattle Public Schools hopes to open the field in the fall of 2029.

Also from KOMO News, a cheeky headline -
Political food fight brews at Seattle City Hall over free school lunches

One day after a Seattle City Council committee voted to delay Mayor Katie Wilson's universal school meals program, three council members unveiled a new proposal that could allow free breakfast and lunch for every Seattle Public Schools student to begin this fall after all. 

Council Budget Chair Dan Strauss, Council President Joy Hollingsworth and Councilmember Dionne Foster announced Thursday that they want to use about $3 million from Seattle's general fund to launch universal meals during the 2026-27 school year. 

The proposal would also preserve a separate six-year investment in grocery cards and other food assistance for lower-income students during weekends and school breaks. 

The idea represents the latest turn in a debate that has exposed divisions at City Hall over how to pay for the mayor's plan and which students should receive the city's limited education funding. 

The mayor initially proposed paying for the program through the cost and risk reserve within Seattle's voter-approved Families, Education, Preschool and Promise, or FEPP, property tax levy.

What did they come up with?

On Wednesday, the council's FEPP Select Committee voted 6-3 to approve an amendment that would postpone the universal meals expansion until the 2027-28 school year. The amendment instead would dedicate $500,000 annually for six years to grocery cards and other assistance for students facing food insecurity during weekends and school breaks.

I concur with Sandeep Kaushik, a political consultant, who said this:

"What's the best use of those dollars?" Kaushik said about the arguments on both sides of the debate. "It's not to subsidize school lunches for middle- and upper-middle-class kids, but maybe to target that money to poor kids."

I also note that from reading the comments, many readers do not understand about the weekend food. The City and the district could do better on that messaging.

I do understand that if the plan was universal, it takes some stigma away from low-income students who might want to access it, especially in middle and high schools.

Universal meals would be moved out of the FEPP levy and funded temporarily through the city's general fund, while the grocery card program would remain in the levy.

Strauss acknowledged that using the general fund carries its own financial risks. Seattle is confronting a projected $175 million budget shortfall next year, raising questions about whether new spending could require cuts elsewhere.

"This is dangerous because it is our inflation and cost escalation account," Strauss said of the mayor's original proposal to use the FEPP reserve.

When asked whether taking money from the general fund was also dangerous, Strauss responded, "We have a structural budget deficit, and that means the city has to weigh its priorities."

It seems to me that they could use the FEEP dollars now and then decide in a year or two if they want to continue that. Going into the General Fund when it is already in deficit seems folly.

It appears the newly-passed millionaires tax was going to be used for these lunches but that won't kick in for a year or two and faces a repeal effort. 

From The Seattle Times:

Wilson’s original plan would have expanded the number of SPS schools offering free breakfast and lunch to all students. About half of the 106 schools in the district currently provide free meals to all students, according to the district’s website.

Under Wilson’s plan, funding for universal free school meals would initially come from the $1.3 billion education-related property tax levy. After the first two years, the state’s high-earners income tax would then fund free school meals.

The committee also voted 8-1 to approve a separate amendment delaying the start of a voucher pilot for the Seattle Preschool Program, which aims to allow families using the city’s free and reduced-cost early learning program more flexibility in finding eligible locations. It also voted 9-0 to approve a bevy of other changes to the levy implementation plan.

I'll have to look up what those changes are to the Seattle Preschool Program. 




Well this is not good - from The Center Square:
Average K-12 supervisor/director salaries increased 33.7% in five years

This is for Washington State. 

“What we’re seeing is the growth of admin in general,” Washington Policy Center for Education Director Vicki Murray told The Center Square. “That’s just been a trend, multidecade trend, and It’s intensifying.”

The data shows that average director or supervisor salaries increased by $20,501 or 33.7% since 2020-21. However, superintendents saw a larger average salary increase dollar-wise, at $23,836 since 2021.

The Center Square analysis examined the top salaries for the following positions: 

 

Director/Supervisor

Elementary/middle school

High school principals

School District Superintendents

Two of these roles experienced significant salary increases after 2020-21; directors or supervisors had an average salary increase of 9.59% from 2020-21 to 2021-22, the highest of the four roles analyzed. That role also experienced, on average, a 9.17% increase between 2021-2022 to 2023-24. Superintendents had the second highest salary increase, at an average increase of 8.60% between 2020-21 and 2021-22.

Murray said that directors and supervisors have taken on a larger role in the K-12 system due to federal mandates and other compliances.

“I don’t necessarily mind that you get great superintendents,” she added. “When you get great leadership, everything falls into place. When it comes to education, the salaries to me is secondary. We want to get value. Are we getting value for what we’re spending?”

Amen to that.

In the Top 10 Director/Supervisor Salaries for the 2024-25 fiscal year was Seattle's Fred Podesta, Kurt Buttleman, and Carlos Del Valle. Podesta made $289,385 with the other two nearly right behind him.

No Seattle elementary principals made the top 10 nor did any secondary principals. There's an elementary principal in Tacoma who makes $276,277 a year! Nice work if you can get it.




From ProPublica:
Trump Administration Launches Crackdown on Teacher Sexual Misconduct Following KQED-ProPublica Investigation

In guidance issued last week, Secretary of Education Linda McMahon cited the news outlets’ reporting in May that California’s teacher licensing agency has not revoked the professional credentials of at least 67 educators who school districts determined had sexually harassed students or committed other types of sexual misconduct. At least 14 of those educators were rehired by other schools.

McMahon threatened to withhold federal funding from public schools that fail to protect children from teacher sexual misconduct. She called on states and school districts to scrutinize their laws and regulations to prevent educators who have engaged in sexual misconduct involving students from obtaining new positions elsewhere. Citing previous reports by the Government Accountability Office and other studies, McMahon said the Department of Education has observed a “troubling and recurring pattern” of credible reports of sexual abuse and harassment by school employees going uninvestigated.

The department is investigating 20 school districts over their data collection practices and handling of allegations of staff sexual harassment of students, McMahon announced. 

The list, which the Trump administration said was built on 2023-24 civil rights data, also includes districts in Georgia, Michigan, Arizona, Connecticut, Kentucky, New Hampshire, Missouri, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and Washington.

Our look at California’s teacher disciplinary process revealed a pattern of delays and inaction, combined with a lack of transparency, that has allowed educators to continue teaching after school districts reported them to the state for sexual harassment or other sexual misconduct.

Some critics characterized McMahon’s latest guidance as political rhetoric and grandstanding, given the Trump administration’s gutting of the Education Department and routine dismissal of civil rights cases.

“Staff-on-student predation occurs less frequently than student-on-student harassment and assault. This letter is silent on that,” said Heidi Goldstein, a personnel commissioner of the Berkeley Unified School District and advisory board member of Stop Sexual Assault in Schools, a national nonprofit. “I look at something like this as a wedge issue you’re going to take to schools to weaken union power overall.”

In her letter, McMahon singled out teachers unions as obstructions to legislative reforms to protect children.

I'm not sure the unions are a barrier in the way McMahon thinks. However, I DO think districts have got to do better with teacher contracts that go out of their way to protect teachers. SPS for sure worries about getting sued by a teacher and generally pays them to go away.  

On the same subject, out of Lynnwood:
Meadowdale Elementary Special Ed Teacher Paid $470,000 Amid A Dozen Sexual Abuse Allegations

This is in the Edmonds School District. It's a devastating story about what may be a predator at an elementary school. 

Via the Lynnwood Times:

The instructor in question is special education instructor David Sibley, who was hired by the district in 2022, and has been investigated by the Lynnwood Police Department, the school’s Human Resources Department, and has numerous sexual abuse allegations about him by students and faculty alike. Despite, the school district has yet to notify parents of these allegations and local prosecutors have declined to pursue charges citing “lack of evidence.”

Sibley was placed on paid administrative leave on August 2024 and will officially resign next month, following a resignation negotiation that began in January. He will have cost the district approximately $470,000 of taxpayer’s money, which does not include lawsuit settlements, since going on leave.

What is shocking is the district and the principal at the school did not notify parents and they were supposed to do so.  

“When is the district going to follow the law and notify parents of the students who were harmed by the teacher at one of our elementary schools? asked Ginnie Berry, ESD certificated music program teacher, certificated substitute and student intervention coordinator. “The district has a responsibility to report that misconduct to the parents. It is not optional; it is the law.”

RCW 28.A.320.160 requires Washington school districts to immediately notify parents or legal guardians if their child is alleged to be the victim, target, or recipient of physical abuse, sexual misconduct, or assault by a school employee or contractor.

According to Berry, even though incidents of sexual misconduct were reported to the principal and superintendent they did not notify the parents.

Instead of hearing back from the board Berry was contacted by the district’s attorney who said the students are safe, and if they weren’t, their families would be notified by the district.

There is also story about a Special Education teacher in SPS who is also under investigation. That warrants its own post which will come soon.