Seattle Schools Community Forum

Catching up with the Seattle Times we find an editorial with unquestioning and unconditional support for the levies and a puff piece on the assignment of Lisa Escobar as co-principal at Rainier Beach High School. More informed and nuanced discussion of these topics can be found in the comments that follow.

( Update and just to make clear - I totally support Prop. 2 - Operations levy. My discussion here is ONLY about Prop. 1 - BTA.) Just to make sure, why are you voting for the BTA levy? As a SPS parent and certified (in one way or another) PTSA member, of course my first impulse is to vote YES. I mean, all of us here are regularly saying how there aren't enough resources for so many things and so the district needs money. So I'll give you a survey at the end and you tell me. But first, I am curious about how people feel about the building that houses your child's school. Does your school have facilities issues (of a maintenance kind, big or small)? The district has to figure out somewhere between $35M-$45M in cuts for the budget. I do know that most people want to believe that cuts are made to keep money going to the classroom. But where is the visible proof of that? Is that wishful thinking or can we look at the district budget and say, oh here's where it is? Th...

This article appeared in Crosscut today. It is probably the more thoughtful of articles on the levies although Mr. Lilly does make a few assumptions. Also the title, "Seattle school levies; thoroughly hated and extremely effective" is over the top. Yes, we hate them because they are work to pass AND the recognition that our state won't pay for basic education. But extremely effective? He'd have to prove that. I give the district a lot of credit for the amount of renovations done but it has steadily slipped from a high of BEX I at about 37 projects to BEX III with about 6 major projects and a few minor. We're doing less with more money. And, of course, then not keeping up the maintenance on these major investments. Yes, that makes perfect sense. From the article: "Not surprisingly, school boards choose the classroom over maintenance pretty much every time. This year Seattle will spend only 0.3 percent of its operating budget on upkeep. That’s typi...

The Seattle Times ran a brief story today about the upcoming levies. Mel was quoted.

Now this is not exactly "hot off the presses" news because you'd expect it. What is sad/funny to me is the lameness of their argument. "Voters antsy about taxes should not be confused. The levies are not new taxes, but a renewal of expiring ones." And that's true but the district is asking for a lot more money. Last BTA was $178M and this is $270M. I asked the district guy who does the finances for the levy and he said: "You are correct that the BTA III levy amount of $270M is more than the BTA III amount of $178M and that the entire city of Seattle will share in paying for this increase. However, because the total assessed value of the entire city of Seattle has increased even with the recent housing market crises, the tax rate per $1000 assessed value for an individual tax payer has remained steady. " "But the School Board must provide greater accountability and transparency of the district's capital dollars. Taxpayers deserve to k...

I recieved my flyer on the School Levy in the mail. It is eight pages of factual information provided about the levies by Seattle Public Schools. People should read and question these flyers carefully. When the question of whether or not people were told about the Denny/Sealth co-location, the flyer was cited as the information that was distributed. I reviewed the flyer with a critical eye, which isn't really very fair. I admit that. I wasn't looking for good with the same diligence that I was looking for error. With that disclaimer, here's what I noticed: The flyer begins with these words: " At Seattle Public Schools, we are committed to providing an excellent education for every student and to ensuring the every school is an excellent school. " I would find that statement a lot more credible if I had a definition of "an excellent education" and "an excellent school". In the absence of any such definitions, I find the statements disingenuous -...

From the district: "The National Board for Professional Teaching Standards announced Wednesday, Dec. 16, that 57 Seattle Public Schools teachers earned their National Board certification in 2009. Seattle now has 174 National Board-certified teachers, and more than 85 additional teachers are working toward certification in 2010. The National Board noted that Seattle Public Schools is among the nation’s top 20 in terms of the number of teachers who achieved national certification in 2009, ranking 15th." Good for all these teachers. Beacon Hill International had the most with 6 newly certified teachers. I also note that this is the silly time of the year when the students come back from Winter Break and have 2 full days off plus an early release day before Feb. 15th when Mid-Winter Break starts. (It's even less time if you are at a school with its own early release/late start days.) There's a regular Board meeting this Wednesday at 6 p.m. The big item is the introd...

The School Board meeting for votes on both the new SAP boundaries and the levies is this Wednesday, the 18th at 6 p.m. You can sign up to speak starting tomorrow at 8 am by: calling 252-0040 or e-mailing boardagenda@seattleschools.org Here's we are, almost to zero hour. I don't want to disappoint anyone but I'm not sure I believe any amendments will come forward. I think only a broad-based one like the "soft" boundaries one (allowing anyone within a block of a school to have access even if it isn't their attendance area school) or the "one-time" option (which would allow anyone within, say, 3 blocks of a non-attendance area school to make the one-time choice to commit to that school). Those would not require moving boundaries. But I think the Board will say they just can't at this point. (And that's why I do not like staff saying, "Oh yes, the Board can do anything up until the vote.") Please let us know if you attended Dir...

Two Public Hearings this week of note. One is the Public Hearing on the Boundary Maps which is tomorrow, Monday the 9th from 6-8 p.m. at the Stanford Center . This is the LAST public input the Board will take (but e-mail/lobby them all you want privately). I didn't call to get on the list as I felt that it was important for continuing parents to have first dibs. I'll call tomorrow and see if it is full (they have room for 40 speakers). I will note that they will ONLY take 40 speakers; this hearing is a specific legal obligation and I have never seen a variation from even when people ask for time for all those who wish to speak. I would advise going as your presence, your applause will count with the Board. The other Public Hearing is on Thursday, the 12th for the BTA III and Operations levies. It is also from 6-8 p.m. I don't know if they have taken sign-ups for this hearing; I'll check tomorrow. This is also important. I support the idea of both levies...

Tuesday, Nov. 3rd from 4-6 p.m., Board Work Session on SAP boundaries. This is the last Work Session before the final vote on November 18th AND the first look at any changes to the boundaries . I would expect the most changes for high schools given that Tracy Libros said that they were not "well-balanced" from the initial release of the boundaries. I am hoping to see the Sand Point Elementary boundaries redrawn as well due to the oddities of how large its F/RL population would be relative to all the other NE elementaries as well as how it doesn't include the Windermere neighborhood. I know the Board has heard from several neighborhoods about issues of boundaries that split neighborhoods (or the perception of) but it is difficult to say how hard the Board will push for any changes here. It is VITAL for any and all of you who look at the new boundaries and are unhappy (and feel it is a good reason) to go to your PTAs/CPPS rep and get going now. The Board needs to her...