Seattle Schools Community Forum

I didn't say this in either of my threads on not signing the charter school petitions or about the pro campaign. Any statements I make about what is and isn't in initiative 1240 are based on my reading of the initiative.  Two other parents read it thoroughly as well (I won't name them because I didn't ask yet) and we cross-referenced our reading. Anything I say, I am happy to back up with a citation of page and section from the initiative.   Just ask. I am confident in my reading of the initiative but if someone sees something I missed or perhaps have wrong, speak up.  But again, I worked with other people to make sure of my understanding of this incredibly dangerous initiative. There in no link to the initiative at the pro-side's website.  They are not going to fully explain everything in the initiative.  They are not going to name citations from the initiative to back up what they are saying are "facts".  You are only going to see that here....

A bit tepid, their website .  It's called - big surprise - "Yes on 1240".  (Interestingly, a web designer I know told me "No on 1240" domain name is taken - very clever.  Only I don't think anyone would want it because, as the designer pointed out, it would read in the URL "noon1240".) There are several things to note about this website: There is NO link to the actual initiative.  Why wouldn't you want people to be able to read what you want them to support?  That says it all.   They say "There will also be an evaluation at the end of the five-year period to determine whether additional public charter schools should be allowed."  See, it's not a pilot project.  Also, if this thing passes, I'd bet money they will ask for the cap to be raised in three years. Of course, they are urging people to "simply" sign the petition so voters can "consider the facts."  I find this very funny because it has NEVER...

The judge in Superior Court heard the challenge to Initiative 1240 yesterday and rejected most of WEA's reasoning (with a few tweaks).    Stand for Children issued a statement saying all the changes from the WEA had been rejected but apparently they don't bother to keep up with what actually happens in court.  They say they will use a combination of volunteer and paid signature gatherers (but there is no legal way to find out how many of each but I suspect an ARMY of paid).  They need about 250,000 signatures to be on the ballot but it would be good to get at least 300,000 for safety's sake. The title now says "Initiative Measure No. 1240 concerns creation of a public charter school system." I totally agree with this as voters need to know this is a system and not just a few schools. The concise description is still over by 3 words but the WEA missed that. Bill Gates has given $200k to the cause and Nick Hanauer has kicked in money as well.  It ...

Jennifer Boutell has started a Facebook page, No on 1240 .  Go and "like" it, if you are so inclined.

Monday Update :  So I did check with Washington State Wire and guess what?  In almost 3 years, I'm (apparently) the first person to get their Melvin G. Aston name.  It is a nom de plume " for a prominent Olympia player " and yes, the opinion piece was serious.  So take from that what you will but mystery cleared up.  (Note: I do Google names +Seattle quick often if I want to try to find out who someone might be say on the School Board public testimony list, etc.  It's amazing how easily you can find out basic info/connections doing that and it's quite useful.)   Update: the name used for the pro-charter opinion at LEV (via Washington State Wire) seems off.  It's credited to Melvin G. Ashton and that's the name of a fictional senator in a 1947 film, The Senator Was Indiscreet.  The senator, according to a review at IMDb, is "bumbling, long-winded and crooked."  I'll have to give Washington Wire a ring tomorrow and see if they are pulli...