E14 - Rundown 5 - New Goals and Guardrails

En Español (Google Translate)

See our Show Notes

 [00:00:01] Jasmine Pulido: Welcome to Rainy Day Recess, where we study and discuss Seattle Public Schools. Thanks for joining us for our weekly rundown. 

Today we're diving into the latest special school board meeting that took place on January 29th, where the board listened to a round of public testimony before discussing and then adopting the district's new goals and guardrails for 2025 to 2030. We'll explore the key discussions, public testimonies, and the final vote. 

We'll also touch on listener feedback and community notes as per our usual rundowns.

Special School Board Meeting, January 29, 2025

[00:00:39] Christie Robertson: Yeah, let's jump into the school board meeting. Which was only like an hour long, wasn't it?

[00:00:45] Jasmine Pulido: It was short.

[00:00:46] Christie Robertson: And it only had one topic, so that helped keep it really focused. 

SBM: Testimony

Unexpectedly, they hadn't said anything about allowing public testimony, but then when the agenda came up, there was a spot for public testimony.

[00:00:58] Jasmine Pulido: And a few people took advantage of that. I want to say at least five people.

[00:01:03] Christie Robertson: I couldn't make out the first two, because the sound was garbled on the video.

[00:01:08] Jasmine Pulido: Very unfortunately. 

[00:01:09] Christie Robertson: Very unfortunately, because it was Meesh Vecchio from the teacher's union, and somebody else. 

[00:01:16] Jasmine Pulido: A trans educator. 

Here's a mashup of the testimony from that meeting.

[00:01:19] Manuela Slye: I spent my morning reaching out to those families that were part of the spring engagements. I hear other people and their disappointment at the way the engagement has happened, but I also want to acknowledge the work that was done and that I was a witness to. And thank you, Director Rankin for being that force behind it and for working in partnership, because you did come to people that otherwise don't have a voice. 

But most importantly, I want to say that beyond thanking you, I want to hold you accountable to implement all these things that you have started a few months ago. So this is not once and done. My people and the people that I spoke to feel disengaged and feel disappointed and disrespected if all you did was to come and grab and harvest their thoughts, their feelings and not do anything with it.

[00:02:14] Sebrena Burr: I want to make sure that 10% is not what we're doing. It is unacceptable. And I also want to ask you: How are you holding the superintendent responsible for the guardrails? Because I don't see it happening. 

[00:02:31] Jessica Chong: Not only are the proposed goals not sensitive to subgroups of students who may be left behind because they're averaging across the district, the proposals also do not account for students who may have started out ahead but are falling behind. 

And I think it would actually be easy to modify Director Rankin's amendment to Guardrail 1 from "the Superintendent will not allow student school assignment, family income, race, ethnicity, deed, or identity to...” “limit," instead of "determine"... "access to high standards, rigorous programming, high quality teaching, and support." 

And then add "that would enable the student to make at least one year of academic growth per year."

[00:03:03] Janis White: According to the board action report, the vision and values of the school district are represented by the goals and guardrails you are going to adopt. But the word “disability” is not mentioned in any of the goals and guardrails and also doesn't appear in the last strategic plan. 

It's imperative for the school board to give specific direction to the superintendent, that the board expects our schools to use the disability justice framework developed by disabled activists of color that centers intersectionality.

Respectfully, the work does not hinge on whether you adopt a goal for 10% or 15% improvement. The work requires centering intersectionality and making changes to our special education system that will produce dramatic improvement in student outcomes.

[00:03:47] Kaitlin Murdock: In the SOFG model, goals and guardrails are the most foundational work. They are the singular public statement of the values of the Seattle education community. As presented today, they fall woefully short due to a rushed engagement strategy. Many of the values from the spring are still missing, namely: 

• a commitment to social emotional learning, 
• multilingual education, 
• cross cultural collaboration, 
• neighborhood and community connections, 
• personalized choices, 
• options for schools and programs, 
• student to teacher ratios, 
• quality staff, 
• transparency, 
• fiscal management, and 
• accountability. 

These are what your constituents expressed as their most basic requirements from SPS and what you have an obligation to monitor closely and consistently. Delay a vote on guardrails until comprehensive, collaborative community engagement can take place.

[00:04:42] Jasmine Pulido: Those speakers were Manuela Slye, Sebrena Burr, Jessica Chong, Janice White, and Kaitlin Murdock.

[00:04:51] Christie Robertson: So let's see, they came into the meeting with the same two goals and five same guardrails as last week's school board meeting. And the two goals were:

• increasing 2nd grade reading for all students by 10% on average, and 
• increasing the rates of graduation without waivers by 10% for all students

[00:05:14] Jasmine Pulido: They had proposed a few amendments that was on the agenda. 

SBM: Reading Goal

The first amendment, put forth by Director Rankin, was to change Goal 1, which is the reading goal, from 10% to 15%, with the explanation that:

[00:05:19] Liza Rankin: My reasoning for that is that it would theoretically be possible to meet the 10% growth without impacting change to the students furthest from educational justice. In order to achieve 15%, or get close to 15%, changes in delivery and resources would have to be made that would not allow for only groups of students who are already at or above to be the sole beneficiaries. 

[00:06:04] Christie Robertson: Yeah, I would love to see that analysis because it's an interesting contention. It sounded like she was saying that you couldn't raise the average by 15% without raising the average of the lowest performing groups. And that's not apparent to me, but it could be true. 

Evan Briggs asked for what the base number is. So some tentative base numbers: currently about 56% of 2nd grade math students are at grade level. So that would be bringing it up to like 71% if you raise it 15 points.

[00:06:42] Jasmine Pulido: And there was a lot of discussion at the last board meeting about this goal being too low, 10%. Putting in the 15% was a response to that as well. I was actually pretty surprised to see that it wasn't unanimous to change this goal above 10%.

[00:07:01] Christie Robertson: Yeah, I was surprised it wasn't unanimous, too. In fact, it didn't pass! And I was trying to think of the last time that something that Director Rankin brought didn't pass. 

[00:07:12] Jasmine Pulido: Yeah. Yeah, it was pretty surprising to start off out the gate, not a pass. And we had Nays from Clark, Mizrahi and President Topp. And then Yes from Rankin and Hersey. And Abstain from Sarju and Briggs. 

[00:07:28] Christie Robertson: What did that mean? Why do you think they abstained?

[00:07:30] Jasmine Pulido: I think Briggs abstained because she still wanted the goal to be 95%.

[00:07:38] Christie Robertson: Right, but like... Why didn't she bring an amendment to have it be 95%? 

[00:07:40] Jasmine Pulido: Well, they didn't have the baseline percentage for reading test scores until this meeting during the discussion. So I'm assuming Briggs couldn't have made an amendment because she didn't know what percentage they would need to raise it by to get it to 95%?

[00:08:03] Christie Robertson: Hmm, I don't know. I think she still could have proposed to raise it to 95%. And I'm thinking maybe the reason is that she knew that it wouldn't pass. But still, I wish that we could have known why they abstained, to have that information for our consideration.

[00:08:21] Jasmine Pulido: Could they explain it before they say their vote?

[00:08:23] Christie Robertson: No, but they could say it during the discussion part. 

[00:08:26] Jasmine Pulido: Oh, okay. One thing that just came to mind for me is that they all say them out loud, and they say them in a certain order, which is really interesting because of the way that groupthink operates. I wonder if these votes would be different if they maybe weren't able to hear each other's votes.

[00:08:48] Christie Robertson: I bet they would. I've noticed that if Sarju votes first, then Briggs often says the same thing as Sarju. And maybe it would be the same the other way around, I don't know. But Hersey was asked second, I think, and he thought really hard about his answer. He was definitely torn, I think.

[00:09:05] Gina Topp: All right, could staff please call the vote on this amendment?

[00:09:08] Ellie Wilson-Jones: Director Clark.

[00:09:09] Gina Topp: Nay.  

[00:09:11] Ellie Wilson-Jones: Director Hersey.

[00:09:15] Brandon Hersey: I'm thinking

Aye. 

[00:09:31] Jasmine Pulido: You could hear the silent calculations for sure.

[00:09:35] Christie Robertson: Clark, Mizrahi, and Topp, all the new directors, definitely came across as a coalition that wanted to have goals that if they didn't achieve, they could say, "What happened?"

[00:09:45] Jasmine Pulido: That's right. So that did not pass. 

[00:09:48] Christie Robertson: It did not pass. 

SBM: Life-Readiness Goal

The second amendment was... I think the best way to explain it is that... They had that big discussion last time about: “Is the High School and Beyond Plan enough on its own?” If you want to, you can refer back to our previous rundown episode for that discussion. 

And it was pretty clear that it's not good enough because the High School and Beyond Plan says what you're going to do, but it doesn't show that you're actually starting down that path.

[00:10:14] Jasmine Pulido: It says that you have an awareness of what you want to do, but it doesn't show any actions that you're currently in the process of implementing the things that you identified.

[00:10:24] Christie Robertson: Like, if you say, “I want to go to college,” but you haven't taken college level classes, or you say that you want to go be an electrician, but you don't have the right math, or you haven't done an internship or whatever prepares you for that. 

[00:10:34] Jasmine Pulido: Yeah. For the record, the substitute language is as follows.

[00:10:44] Liza Rankin: 

“The percentage of students that graduate having completed Washington State graduation requirements as consistent with their individual High School and Beyond Plan and having completed one of the following: 

• dual credit work in ELA, world language, the arts, social studies, STEM, or CTE, 
• or a formal work based learning experience,
• FAFSA and WAFSA,
• applications to one or more college, work based program, or other post secondary program 

will increase from, to be determined pending available baseline data, in June 25 to Pending baseline data June 2030."

[00:11:25] Christie Robertson: I wish that directors would work with somebody to help with the wording before they bring it. 

So that's the second amendment. What was the voting on that? 

[00:11:36] Jasmine Pulido: That one passed. 

[00:11:37] Christie Robertson: Everyone said Yes except for Sarju, who abstained. Why do you think she abstained?

[00:11:42] Jasmine Pulido: I don't even think Sarju commented on that 

[00:11:44] Christie Robertson: I just would have loved to know what she was thinking.

[00:11:46] Jasmine Pulido: Yeah, I would have liked to hear that too. 

SBM: Math Goal

The third one... So this one was sponsored by Director Clark, and it was keeping the middle school math goal that was taken out originally. Yeah, so this one was with a 10% increase from baseline for middle school math. 

The decline in test scores, they found, happens most significantly in 6th grade, from the data. There was a little bit of discussion about this before they did their vote. And Rankin talked about potentially the 6th grade decline might be from the inconsistency of elementary schools going into middle school. 

[00:12:27] Liza Rankin: I would, maybe, posit that the decline in 6th grade comes from inconsistent preparation in elementary school, but I don't know. And this is very anecdotal because this is just my experience as a parent with one of my kids in particular, was that he was able to be reasonably accommodated for different math abilities. And it was the transition to 6th grade that kind of halted, and really, to be quite honest, the start of really hating school. 

And so I wonder if we're looking at the 6th grade measure (and again, this is my own child, so I don't have data other than that except for knowing that our math pathway requires everybody to take Math 6 if they didn't come from a cohort school)... I'm wondering how the goal being in 6th grade could either hinder or support a little more flexibility as kids enter middle school

[00:13:22] Jasmine Pulido: Dr. Anderson, the Director of Research and Evaluation, talked about a larger drop off in 6th grade for African American boys compared to 5th grade. It's worth noting that this data is from the pandemic.

[00:13:39] Eric Anderson: We looked at the year-over-year comparisons: “What happens as kids progress over time?” And where we actually see the biggest drop off in the last three years of the pandemic is between 5th and 6th grade. And that is a larger drop off for African American males or students of color. In fact, there's a 10% decline in the proficiency rates in 6th grade for African American boys compared to 5th grade. 

[00:14:08] Jasmine Pulido: Dr. Caleb Perkins, Executive Director of College and Career Readiness, spoke on that the high water mark is actually 4th grade. 

[00:14:18] Caleb Perkins: The good news, just from the data front, it looks like the high water mark is 4th grade, and then there's this decline. And I think you're bringing up another hypothesis, Director Rankin, that focusing on this goal would help us unpack: Is it that some students aren't being challenged, so they tune out? There's other kind of just pedagogical reasons. The fact that they're needing to develop a certain level of fluency in 6th grade in order to be able to succeed in seven and eight.

I think it's a much longer conversation about how much we differentiate within math six, which I think is a healthy one. But we should be measured by whether we're making that transition from 5th to 6th grade. Right now we're not supporting it well. And I think it's helpful that the school board is shining a light on that.

[00:14:57] Jasmine Pulido: Clark did reaffirm that the language will allow a focus on the transition from 5th to 6th grade. 

[00:15:04] Sarah Clark: For the academic team, do you guys feel that the way that the math goal is worded, will allow us to focus on that transition from 5th to 6th? 

[00:15:18] Caleb Perkins: Yes, this has already sparked conversations about how we would do a better job of looking at the feeder schools, the elementary schools going into the middle school.

[00:15:26] Jasmine Pulido: And then Jones did say that they would take into consideration for the interims that transition 5th into 6th.

[00:15:33] Brent Jones: And I would just add in: the development of the interims, we would take that duly into consideration as we construct that. So it's not just 6th grade. We might say, “What do we need as a precursor? How do we avoid that drop off between 4th and 5th and 6th?” 

[00:15:47] Christie Robertson: I think that what we sometimes lose track of – both them and me – is that the point where you're measuring is to see if you succeeded in the interventions that you did earlier. So you're not measuring where you're doing the interventions. You're not measuring 7th grade because that's where you're doing your interventions. You're measuring it because you did them before.

[00:16:05] Jasmine Pulido: Yeah, totally. 

The preliminary baseline for 6th grade math SBA test scores is 56% as well, interestingly enough. 

[00:16:13] Christie Robertson: I know, isn't that funny? I was like, did they misspeak on one of them, or does it just happen to be the exact same?

[00:16:18] Jasmine Pulido: Yeah, it's really interesting. And there was that mention in the last meeting about how reading scores are correlated with math scores. 

[00:16:28] Caleb Perkins: If they don't succeed in middle school, that is the linchpin. There are definitely things getting more complex, more word problems. And that's to Dr. Jones's connection between the reading and math piece.

[00:16:37] Jasmine Pulido: That was Dr. Perkins again. I don't know. it just seems so uncanny that it's the exact same number 

Anyway, so this one passed. But there are two Abstains – Sarju and Briggs.

[00:16:51] Christie Robertson: Yep. With no explanation. 

[00:16:53] Jasmine Pulido: No explanations.

[00:16:54] Christie Robertson: There is now a math goal.

[00:16:55] Jasmine Pulido: Yep. 

So we went through three amendments. There was a 4th amendment, but it was basically the math goal, but with a 15% increase. And since they passed Clark's amendment with a 10% increase, they decided to skip that.

SBM: Guardrail 1

[00:17:10] Christie Robertson: The last amendment was also from Rankin. And it was about re-wording the guardrail that everybody had agreed was confusing – that it could mean that they were lowering standards for everybody to try to make things equal. When actually they wanted to make sure that everybody is getting access to the same things.

[00:17:26] Jasmine Pulido: Rankin sponsored this amendment and did mention that they heard in the public testimony that changing the wording, replacing "determine" with "limit" as a more descriptive word. And Rankin said she appreciated that, but it was too late because they had already submitted the amendment? 

[00:17:45] Liza Rankin:  I do like the suggestion made to switch “determine” to “limit”. However, that's not what is on here.

[00:17:53] Jasmine Pulido: But I was confused about that because what's the use of having public testimony if you can't change anything? 

[00:18:01] Christie Robertson: I guess they could have said “pass” or “don't pass” on any individual amendment that had been pre supplied. But I'm surprised that she couldn't reword it then.

[00:18:08] Jasmine Pulido: Do they have to be amended in advance? 

[00:18:10] Christie Robertson: That's like that time that Topp tried to bring something to the meeting. 

But that was even brand new. I swear I've seen them in a meeting, like, reword something that was an amendment that was coming before them. 

[00:18:21] Jasmine Pulido: Yeah, that's right. I remember, when they did the resolution for zero to five schools, I think Hersey on the spot asked to amend it. And they did. So I guess I don't understand why they couldn't have amended this on the spot.

[00:18:36] Christie Robertson:  Okay, here's a very abbreviated version of what happened at the October 9th, 2024 school board meeting, where Director Hersey offered an amendment that was immediately adopted.

[00:18:49] Brandon Hersey:  So, one of the pieces of feedback that we received both in public testimony and in some of the communications that I'm sure went to multiple board directors was clarity around the fact that we are no longer considering closing 20 schools. I'm happy to offer an amendment to that effect. Do I need to write it down? Or can I just say it? 

[00:19:09] Greg Narver: We need to know exactly what the amendment is. 

[00:19:13] Ellie Wilson-Jones: “Resolved that the Seattle School Board of Directors directs the superintendent to present preliminary recommendations for up to five school closures, but not more than five school closures, to be implemented for the 25-26 school year.

[00:19:29] Michelle Sarju: I move that we consider this amendment as offered by Director Hersey.

[00:19:34] Evan Briggs: I second. 

[00:19:35] Christie Robertson:  And then they voted on the amendment. And they immediately voted on the underlying item, which was the resolution for a new proposal to close up to five schools.

If anybody wants to give us more clarity on what can and can't be moved in a school board meeting, please let us know. 

To me, this just feels like an unwieldy process. Like... 

[00:20:00] Jasmine Pulido: Welcome to government. 

[00:20:02] Christie Robertson: But I've been watching the legislature, and it just does not seem this complicated. 

[00:20:06] Jasmine Pulido: Actually, yeah, you know what? I would say that the five minutes that I watched the Early Learning committee meeting, I was like, “Wow, this feels really professional and streamlined.”

[00:20:12] Christie Robertson: It's interesting to think about what's different between the legislature and the school board. One of which is that the legislature has a lot of paid staff. They also have legislators that have been serving in office for decades. And they are paid. 

And then there's the OPMA laws (Open Public Meetings Act) that act differently in the school board. Something that's so weird about the school board is that they are limited in how much they can talk outside of the meeting. 

Most of what happens in the legislature does not happen in that committee hearing room. It's like, everybody's running around and calling each other and texting each other and emailing each other and having millions of meetings. So then, when they actually get in there, they basically know what's going to happen. So it can be really streamlined. 

[00:21:11] Jasmine Pulido: Interesting. 

So this amendment was the one that Sarju approved. And I think everyone approved this one. 

[00:21:16] Christie Robertson: Yeah, this guardrail rewording amendment was unanimous.

[00:21:21] Jasmine Pulido: When Sarju approved, Ellie asked her to repeat herself, because she had abstained on everything.

[00:21:28] Christie Robertson: Oh yeah!

[00:21:32] Jasmine Pulido: That's the only thing that Sarju said. 

Here's Ellie Wilson Jones, Director of Policy and Board Relations, with Director Sarju.

[00:21:38] Ellie Wilson-Jones: Calling the vote. Director Sarju.

[00:21:43] Michelle Sarju: Aye.

[00:21:44] Ellie Wilson-Jones: Sorry, I didn't catch that. Was it... Was that an Aye this time? Or is it? 

[00:21:52] Michelle Sarju: No, what you really mean is you was expecting something different. 

[00:21:55] Ellie Wilson-Jones: I was. 

[00:21:56] Michelle Sarju: I said Aye. 

[00:21:56] Ellie Wilson-Jones: It was an Aye though. Okay. 

SBM: Adoption of the Goals and Guardrails

[00:21:58] Jasmine Pulido: And then there was one underlying item, which is that they did have to vote on the full package of goals and guardrails with the amendments. 

[00:22:08] Christie Robertson: Yes, with the three amendments that had passed.

[00:22:11] Jasmine Pulido: Amendments two, three, and five passed. So those would be in this package. And then everyone passed the full package of goals and guardrails with the amendments, except Briggs and Sarju said No. They didn't even abstain, they said No.

[00:22:28] Christie Robertson: No. And it seemed like they knew they were going to say that before they came in. I assume it was about the wanting the numbers to be higher. But again, I'm just surprised that they didn't make an amendment about that.

[00:22:41] Jasmine Pulido: Yep. 

[00:22:42] Christie Robertson: It’s interesting that we're back to having split votes. Because for a while there was a real dedication to that the board should be one voice, no dissent.

[00:22:52] Jasmine Pulido: And do you feel like that transition happened quite starkly, like as soon as the presidency changed over?

[00:22:59] Christie Robertson: I think it was starting to happen a little bit just with the new board directors coming on. There was a little bit of more dissent. And to me it feels like a comfortable dissent. So, yes, Briggs and Sarju voted no, but they're still going to work on the goals and guardrails along with everybody else. Like "I disagreed, but this is what we're doing, and so I'm going to do my best to make it work."

[00:23:20] Jasmine Pulido: Yeah, interesting. I did think about this a little bit, which was they talked about it as “alignment” and “misalignment”. As in, “the board is aligned on this together”, and, “the board is misaligned on this.” 

Which implies a sort of compliance model of, "we all walk together in the same direction in order to be a powerful force." So a “compliance model” versus, I guess, what you would call, like, a “debate model”. Which is that everyone comes with a diversity of ideas and hashes it out, and that's just part of the process. And that's not necessarily seen as a bad thing. 

For me, I do feel like sometimes the compliance model moralizes people for having different opinions. Which, if we're talking about uplifting diversity, then I think that actually flies in the face of that, and it encourages conformity. That might be good for consolidating power, but I don't know if it's necessarily great for a democratic process. 

[00:24:29] Christie Robertson: Yeah, the dissent form feels more democratic to me. And I think the attraction to the other one is almost religious or ideology-based. "But we're right. And so we want to get on board only people who agree with us that this is right, so that we can power through and do the things that are important, even though a lot of people disagree with it.”

[00:24:42] Jasmine Pulido: It feels like steamrolling. You're with us or you're getting flattened. 

[00:24:49] Christie Robertson: I also appreciate that people were able to dissent, and they moved on and they talked about the next amendment. So it didn't have to be a big deal. They can still come together in the end. 

[00:24:52] Jasmine Pulido: And then they ended and did “executive session to review the performance of a public employee.” Who is that?

[00:25:00] Christie Robertson: Let's see, who's their one and only employee? 

[00:25:02] Jasmine Pulido: Hmm. 

[00:25:02] Christie Robertson: That would be Dr Brent Jones, superintendent.

[00:25:04] Jasmine Pulido: Okay. shall we move on? 

NAEP

[00:25:08] Christie Robertson: Yeah, so this actually ties in: I just wanted to mention that the NAEP scores came in. It's spelled N A E P and it stands for... 

[00:25:18] Jasmine Pulido: National Assessment of Educational Progress.

[00:25:21] Christie Robertson: It is sort of a survey of student performance that's done around the whole country. It's sometimes called “the nation's report card”. A lot of people were very interested in this because the last time this was done was ‘22, which was like the heart of the pandemic, and everybody wanted to see how well recovery was going. 

Unfortunately, the results were not very good. There has not been much recovery. A few states have seen some recovery. 

But the biggest problem, the thing that has recovered the least and is actually getting worse is the split between the top performing and the lowest performing students. The haves and the have-nots are getting further apart. So again, just looking at the average doesn't tell you the full story. And the kids who are having the most trouble are having more trouble than before. 

And this ties into the goals and guardrails and one of my main difficulties with them looking just at the average. 

[00:26:15] Jasmine Pulido: Yeah, it also seems to mirror the income inequality that's widening, if those are related. 

[00:26:20] Christie Robertson: Yep.

Okay, thank you, Department of Education. 

Community Notes and Listener Feedback 

[00:26:24] Jasmine Pulido: And then listener feedback...

We got a email regarding acronyms that we say on the show. Oh my gosh, I can't tell you how many times I've struggled with acronyms on the show, which maybe is showing my trajectory of progress because I missed some of these acronyms being spelled out in our last episode.

[00:26:47] Christie Robertson: I know, that's the worst. The more familiar you get, the harder it is to stick to this.

This email is from Lee Simmons who gave us permission to share. She is an SPS grandmother of two at TOPS, where she also tutors and subs. And she says, 

“I wonder if you can clarify (and stop using) acronyms. What is F R L? F or L? And there are others that mystify even those closely connected. 

That said, keep up the good work.”

Thank you for writing in, Lee.

[00:27:16] Jasmine Pulido: Absolutely. And totally reaffirming because I always listen to the episode after it airs because I want to hear what the final result sounds like. 

[00:27:24] Christie Robertson: Mm hmm. I do too. 

[00:27:26] Jasmine Pulido: And I noticed that “FRL” part. I was like, “ah, got away with me there.” I was happy to see that reminder. 

[00:27:34] Christie Robertson: Yes, and FRL, by the way, stands for Free and Reduced-price Lunch, which is a federal measure that is used by all the states as a shorthand for the level of poverty at a school. The "percent FRL".

[00:27:48] Jasmine Pulido: Let's talk about community notes.

Notes: Billion Dollar Bake Sale

[00:27:51] Jasmine Pulido: The first is the billion dollar bake sale And we both went. 

[00:27:55] Christie Robertson: I talked with one of the organizers as everything was getting set up.

[00:27:58] Alex Wakeman Rouse: My name is Alex Wakeman Rouse. I am board co-chair of All Together for Seattle Schools and helping run this Billion Dollar Bake Sale Washington campaign. 

Oh my gosh, it's amazing. We are having hundreds of parents, educators, and students come to Olympia to rally for better funding for public schools. We have people from as far south as Vancouver, from as far north as Bellingham. We have folks coming from the islands. We have someone from Spokane!

I think we have 25 to 30 districts represented today. We have at least 40 legislator meetings. We have five schools coming here for field trips from Seattle Public Schools. So we are just thrilled. 

And obviously everybody is here because they think now is the time for Washington to be bold and fully fund education. Because education is the cornerstone of democracy. It helps with equity and social justice. And without it, our communities can't thrive. 

[00:29:01] Jasmine Pulido: How was your experience?

[00:29:03] Christie Robertson: Oh, it was great. 

I was very impressed by how well organized it was, and I really appreciate the coalition-building in that group, that is trying really hard not to exclude or divide and just, "where can we come together To ask our state to fund our schools?" I thought that was very effectively done. 

[00:29:27] Jasmine Pulido: Yeah. 

They had a rally at Tivoli fountain, which is in front of the Capitol building. They had a line of speakers there who did a few short... speeches, basically. Chris Reykdal is the state superintendent of public instruction. 

[00:29:37] Chris Reykdal: <drowned by cheers> Tell them education is the paramount duty!

[00:29:47] Jasmine Pulido: I felt pretty pumped after listening to that one. 

[00:29:54] Christie Robertson: Last few months, he's really been impressive in advocating for schools. 

I want to mention that the Washington Education Association, which is Seattle Education Association's parent, paid for all the rally stuff and everything. So another great coalition there. 

[00:30:10] Jasmine Pulido: Oh, I didn't know that. That's great. Wow. What amazing community organizing. And other speakers: parents from other districts, representatives, educators, and did Senator Pedersen also speak?

[00:30:24] Christie Robertson: He was on the list of tentative speakers, 

[00:30:25] Jasmine Pulido: Okay, I thought I saw some footage of him speaking. 

[00:30:30] Christie Robertson: Oh, ok. Great. 

[00:30:32] Senator Jamie Pedersen: We have already had hearings on and are moving out bills to increase our funding for special education. <cheers> For Materials, Supplies, and Operating Costs for districts. <cheers> And for student transportation. <cheers> 

[00:30:47] Jasmine Pulido: And there were, I want to say, five schools who came on tour also. And that was amazing to have all those students there to get to see what the legislative process is like and tour the building. 

[00:30:59] Christie Robertson: Yeah, I think a lot of the fundraising from the Billion Dollar Bake Sale went to fund those buses.

[00:31:05] Jasmine Pulido: I saw Sacagawea, Graham Hill, Dunlap... It was great to see some South Seattle school representation. And there was also Orca and Gatewood there on field trips. All Seattle public schools. 

[00:31:19] Christie Robertson: After the rally, everybody split up into their legislative districts, and there were appointments set up with legislators. So I went to the 46th one with Rep Pollet and the legislative aide for Rep Farivar.

[00:31:32] Jasmine Pulido: Yeah, how'd that go? Was it a big group?

[00:31:34] Christie Robertson: It was a very big group. I got there late because They made me go through screening twice. And then, shortly after I got there, a kid threw up on Rep Pollet, so... 

[00:31:44] Jasmine Pulido: Oh no!

[00:31:45] Christie Robertson: I'm sorry, Rep Pollet! It was... yeah.

[00:31:48] Jasmine Pulido: Oh no! 

[00:31:48] Christie Robertson: Yeah, he had to excuse himself to go change. 

But then we stayed and talked to their legislative aides for a while. But, Pollet is probably the most supportive legislator.

[00:31:59] Jasmine Pulido: In regards to education? 

[00:32:00] Christie Robertson: Yes, and special education. 

[00:32:01] Jasmine Pulido: Yeah, I also was able to stay for the legislative meetings. We saw Representative Liz Barry, and their legislative aide. And then we also saw Representative Julia Reed. They were both so nice. And they were both very supportive. Both had mentioned putting pressure on our new governor in regards to the education budget being number one priority. Something for listeners if you want to keep taking actions. There's one there. 

And they also mentioned maybe coming back to Olympia. 

[00:32:32] Christie Robertson: Yeah, I spoke with another one of the organizers, Megan Fisher, after the event, and she said the same thing.

[00:32:40] Megan Fisher: We had over 250 kids come from field trips alone. And, yeah, it was incredibly successful. I think... Meeting with our legislators afterwards, they said to keep up the pressure, that it was an incredible event, and they were hearing about it from all of their other constituents.

[00:32:56] Jasmine Pulido: And so there are going to be a few more legislative action days coming up. 

[00:33:02] Christie Robertson: Yes, maybe we'll see them again. has one on February 17th. I'm sure we'll talk about that more. 

Was that your first time meeting with a legislator, Jas?

[00:33:09] Jasmine Pulido: I've never met with any of my representatives before. 

And I was really just struck by, just like, the amount of barriers they are to get into that room. There are so many ways that I could have not made it into that room. There's no parking. And then you gotta figure out where the elevator is. Which, by the way, I didn't find it. Someone helped me. And then, I was, like, with the baby. And so, there was, like, a lactation room, but you have to go and check in at the desk to find the lactation room. 

[00:33:17] Christie Robertson: And then the security lines.

[00:33:19] Jasmine Pulido: Like, “I'm never gonna go to this meeting. I'm never gonna make it.” But I made it to the meeting. And the meeting is really short. It's 15 minutes. And so, because we had a big group, everyone had to talk really fast. And I feel like the language barrier could be a pretty big thing under a very small timeline.

[00:33:37] Christie Robertson: Those are all really great points, Jas.

[00:33:39] Jasmine Pulido: I did mention the podcast, and a lot of people were like, "I listen to the podcast! I love it!" And I was like, "Oh my gosh, this feels weird.” Like it feels really weird to be recognized in person, right? 

[00:33:47] Christie Robertson: Because we hear from people on email, but only a tiny fraction of our listeners write in to us. So, yeah. I was doing registration, and I was surprised the number of people that were like, "Oh my gosh, I love your podcast." That was very affirming. So thank you so much, everybody.

[00:34:07] Jasmine Pulido: It was really affirming. The biggest comment was a lot of people felt that they were a lot more informed about education as a result of listening. 

[00:34:15] Christie Robertson: Which is our big goal! 

[00:34:17] Jasmine Pulido: So, really thankful that I got to go through that process and meet our legislators. Yeah, and just really struck by how receptive they were to listening to community. Basically Representative Reed didn't really say anything. She was just like, “Oh, what do you want me to do? Oh, okay, I'm listening.” And just, like, really listened. 

[00:34:35] Christie Robertson: That is great. Because a lot of legislators will be like “If I can just talk through the 15 minutes, then I don't have to listen to what you have to say.” Oliver Miska spoke about “Don't let your legislator control the meeting. You control the meeting.”

[00:34:48] Oliver Miska: Raise your hand if you've talked to legislators before. That's solid. Raise your hand if you feel insecure when talking to legislators. Sure. Okay, I love that. That makes a lot of sense. A lot of them are super condescending. Don't let that happen. That's my first lesson. Walk in there, and you are facilitating. Do not let them facilitate that meeting. 

[00:35:17] Jasmine Pulido: Yeah, I mean we did give them like a minute at the end to be like, “and what do we need to know.”

[00:35:20] Christie Robertson: That's great. I was really glad. you made it. And I was glad you got to see a committee hearing, because that’s really interesting to see too, right?

[00:35:28] Jasmine Pulido: Yeah. I mean, I only got to watch a couple minutes. I think people were very aware that I was there with a baby. And he was, of course, throwing his toy. And so I was like, “we just got to get out of here.” But it was really cool. How much did you watch?

[00:35:41] Christie Robertson: I stayed for the whole meeting. Yeah, because I wanted to see them vote on the Big 3 Senate bills.

[00:35:48] Jasmine Pulido: Awesome. I really wish I could have stayed and watched more.

[00:35:51] Christie Robertson: Another time. 

Notes: Organizing

[00:35:52] Christie Robertson: Next set of community notes are about some organizing that some parents are doing.

[00:35:57] Jasmine Pulido: There's an option schools coalition that has formed and has submitted a complaint in regards to waitlist enrollments. SSOC, Seattle Student Options Coalition. The website is seattlestudentoptions.org. 

[00:36:14] Christie Robertson: There's also some movement around advanced learning. This is about the fact that the HCC (Highly Capable Cohort) has been phasing out. We did an episode about this with Jie Lei. And they are asking for people to testify at the February 12th school board meeting. If you're interested in that, you can contact saveadvancedlearning@gmail.com. 

Notes: SOFG

[00:36:42] Christie Robertson: There's also been some community talk about student outcomes focused governance. There's a brand new book out that has some criticism of the framework that's called, Navigating School Board Politics: A Framework for Advancing Equity, released by Harvard Education Press. We have not read this book yet, but are curious about it, and maybe we should have a book club or something.

[00:37:06] Jasmine Pulido: It does talk about student outcomes focused governance specifically having some significant limitations. 

[00:37:13] Christie Robertson: Maybe we should read the quote that people are passing around from it.

[00:37:17] Jasmine Pulido: Oh yeah, so this quote by Carrie R. Sampson, the author of this book, says, 

"To be clear, school boards should have specific goals, including ones focused on academics... However, schools are often the center of our communities. While youth in our schools are the priority, school boards also represent the ecosystem that schools emerge from, including the families of our youth, the communities that surround and shape our schools, and those who work within and for our schools.”

[00:37:48] Christie Robertson: And I really appreciate all this conversation. I appreciate the attention to how school boards work, that even bringing in the student outcomes focused governance model has brought to the arena. I think it's just good to talk about what's effective and what's not.

Levies

[00:38:03] Jasmine Pulido: Our last topic is the levies, which are coming up very quickly now. If you haven't voted, you should get your ballot in the mail.

[00:38:22] Christie Robertson: There's two levies on a special ballot due on February 11th. 

One is an operations levy. So basically everything that makes a school run. Including staffing.

And then the other one is a capital levy. It basically funds building, and fixing up buildings, and such like that. And also our whole technology budget is in there. 

[00:38:32] Jasmine Pulido: Everyone is pretty unanimous about the first levy. People were saying, “Yes for the operations levy. Let's do it.” 

[00:38:39] Christie Robertson: So the controversy is really about the second levy, the capital levy for buildings. 

[00:38:42] Jasmine Pulido: I read from the Seattle Times editorial board that they were saying, "Have caution about the capital levy." I just want to say, like, I don't understand. How you do that exactly? Like they're not saying “no”, but there's no, like, "caution” to check. So it was just like, I don't understand what... They just don't want to say no outright, but they not they're not for it. 

So I read that. And then The Stranger actually said Yes to the second levy, because they didn't think that voting down the levy was the right choice to send a message to the district. 

And then another one in the Seattle Times, an opinion piece by a few parents, advocates, educators that want to vote for the capital levy but feel like they can't because of what reasons, Christie?

[00:39:42] Christie Robertson: I think the biggest thing is, a lot of these parents were at schools that were slated for closure, back when the district was planning on closing schools. And the thing that I've heard the most about is that there's a new school building that's in that capital levy. And it's very confusing to people that the district says that they have way too much building capacity, so much that they need to close schools, and yet they're planning on building a brand new high capacity building. And I can imagine there being reasons that would make sense, but the district has been extremely cagey. 

We had them at Eckstein to come and talk about the levies, and then followed up with questions and it just... it did not feel like very satisfying answers. 

Here's that email exchange, read by artificial voices.

[00:40:28] Voice 1: Which specific schools are being considered for the unnamed school replacement/rebuild project? 

[00:40:34] Voice 2: After the election, Seattle Public Schools will engage in an extended process to determine which elementary school replacement/rebuild project to recommend to the School Board. Considerations will include Board Policy, Board Guiding Principles, currently available and long-term capacity needs (for example, the City of Seattle’s proposed Comprehensive Plan notes the desire to construct 300,000 housing units within the existing city boundaries within the next 20 year to address housing issues), Facilities Condition and Safety and Security. 

[00:41:07] Voice 1: Why is a rebuild being planned when we are under capacity and were recently considering closing schools? 

[00:41:13] Voice 2: Seattle Public Schools has 65 elementary schools that date from 1892 to 2023. Building systems generally have a life span of 30 years, so renovations and replacements are continual to address facility condition needs. It should also be noted that there are currently 140 portables located at our existing elementary schools and while they provide capacity relief, the elimination of these structures at school sites will enhance school safety and security for a myriad of reasons.

[00:41:46] Christie Robertson: So, but the argument I've heard on the other side is, "yeah, but if you turn down the levy, that's hurting kids." 

[00:41:51] Jasmine Pulido: Or, “if you turn down the levy, that's neglecting to get money, and we're already underfunded.” Yeah.

[00:42:00] Christie Robertson: The argument coming back to that is, from what I understand from reading these articles, the district could come back with a revised version at some point this year. So I think people are thinking "maybe we can send them the message that they need to explain this better, and don't build brand new schools without redrawing the boundaries, or like having a plan for how that's going to impact the schools around it."

[00:42:22] Jasmine Pulido: Yeah, and the biggest thing I heard is that it says "an unnamed school." Have we ever seen that happen where they didn't name the school?

[00:42:30] Christie Robertson: That's a good question. Since we recorded, We have heard from unnamed sources that levies started in 1995, and there has not been an unnamed school. But we would love something more authoritative than this hearsay. 

Jas did a little bit of research and looked at levies dating back to 2013 on the SPS website and 2009 on King County ballot measures and didn't see any sign of unnamed schools. But please fill us in with more information. 

[00:43:03] Jasmine Pulido: Yeah, let us know.

[00:43:04] Christie Robertson: Also, since we recorded, there was another op-ed in the Seattle Times saying that it's important to pass the BEX levy. So we will link to that from our show notes as well. There certainly are a lot of opinions on both sides. 

[00:43:18] Jasmine Pulido: Alright, I think that's it.

[00:43:20] Christie Robertson: Yep. This podcast was brought to you by Christie Robertson...

[00:43:24] Jasmine Pulido: ...and Jasmine Pulido. Visit our website to see our show notes, to subscribe so you don't miss an episode, or to donate to help us fund our work.

[00:43:32] Christie Robertson: Email us at hello@rainydayrecess.org. Thanks to Lester Mayo and the Manzana movement for our theme music. Stay curious, stay cozy, and join us next time for Rainy Day Recess.