six applicants remain

The Olympia School Board has whittled down the list of replacements for Bob Shirley and Russ Lehman. Three each, The Olympian reports:

Those who remain under consideration for Director District 3 are Jim Justin, Doug Pennington and Eileen Thomson.

Those who remain under consideration for Director District 5 are Mark Campeau, Jerry Vick and Ron Wieland.

The paper notes that the public will have a chance to question the remaining candidates. Only problem: no date or time. The district website provides the missing clues.

Members of the public are invited to attend a forum of the candidates for School Board on Tuesday, August 12th at the Knox Administrative Center, 1113 Legion Way SE, Olympia. Candidates for Director District #3 and Director District #5 will answer questions from members of the audience. The session for Director District #3 is scheduled for 6:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m., with the session for Director District #5 scheduled from 7:45 p.m. to 9:15 p.m.

3 is Shirley's vacated post; 5 belonged to Lehman. Got three free hours?

Allen Miller's debut, featuring... Avanti High School

I attended the first couple hours of last night's Board meeting, just to see how Allen Miller's first date with destiny went. Justice Gerry Alexander began the proceedings by swearing in the newest member of the Board, describing him as a "fine, upstanding, and public-spirited citizen... I know you'll find him a hard worker and an excellent person to deal with."

Miller, at least as long as I was there, had to sit and listen, mostly, as staff and students from Avanti High School shared data, art, projects, and testimonials about the value of alternative education. Most engaging were the snippet from The Importance of Being Earnest and the stair-climbing robots.

"Originally, we were a stereotypical alternative school," said Principal Michael Velasquez. He noted that Joy Walton, through her efforts at designing a performance-based curriculum, "turned this program into something unique." A study commissioned by OSPI places Avanti in the top ten alternative programs in the state.

Other meeting highlights included several community comments in favor of protecting activities and sports from the budget ax. Jennifer Forster, representing the South Sound Reading Foundation, noted that the group distributed 5,000 books to OSD students last year.

Also, Linda Lamb of the State Board of Education came to discuss the evolving math standards, including the upcoming 3rd-year requirement. It could be adopted as early as July of this year. However, it creates one problem and exposes another: insufficient math teachers, and insufficient preparation at the middle and elementary level. Says Lamb, "[Students] don't all enter, as freshmen, prepared, and they don't all achieve at the same stage... We need good teachers, and ways of keeping kids at the rigor we need." And, importantly, "We are also recommending that the legislature fund what we recommend." In her estimation, levies won't be the answer, if an extra year's going to be a basic education requirement.

Last, I note an interesting geographic shift: now Frank Wilson has a different seat. From left-to-right: Carolyn Barclift, Miller, Bob Shirley, Wilson, and Russ Lehman.

Allen Miller is your fifth Board member

I've been caught up preparing for my National Board exam--yes, later today, I feel the pain of a high-stakes test--so I've had to put my District-blogging to the side, mostly.

I will say I'm not entirely surprised that the ESD chose Allen Miller. When the Board deadlocked on Keeffe-v-Tsou-or-Parker, and when I heard the ESD discuss the importance of moving forward, I figured they might go with the guy without any strong ties to any of the sitting members, and without any potential for extra fractiousness once his term began. A couple quotes sustain this thought:

"I think in looking at all the qualifications at all the applicants, all of them were highly qualified. Mr. Miller had the best chance of succeeding in the current environment on the board," Winner said.

"I think his skills of mediating and arbitrating and overall resume was very strong," said board member Rex Comstock.

"We were looking for people whose first priority is kids, and people who could work with other people," said board member Marvin Lam. "Because of the problem there with the existing board, we were looking for someone who could work with them."

What does it mean for the District? Time will tell. There will be a committed group watching Miller's every move, to see if he lines up on one side or another, and how often, because suspicion's still out there that Miller is the conspiracy-appointed rubber-stamper for the Axis of Lahmann.

I don't know, because I don't know and haven't met Miller. That's my only disappointment: that he came in under the radar, and that the public never got a chance to weigh in on his worth. But we've got a lot of work ahead of us, so it won't be long before we all know what Miller's made of.

Now, back to prepping. I've got a test to take.

a new face after all: Allen Miller throws hat in OSD ring

Turns out I got a premature report from the ESD yesterday; The Olympian says that Allen Miller, a local attorney, has jumped out of the seats and into the ring.

Miller has a long list of civic activities, including past campaign chairman and past president of the United Way of Thurston County, a school board member of St. Michael School, Olympia Planning Commissioner, and board member of the Olympia-Yashiro Sister City Association, South Sound YMCA and other organizations.

Miller said his experience with mediation could be an asset on the board.

"I'm an attorney and I've been involved in arbitration, and I've been a mediator and arbitrator," he said.

"I try to bring people together, and I've been able to look at all sides."

The ESD 113 Board meets at noon on Wednesday, May 14 to interview Miller and the other existing candidates.

So... any new conspiracy theories? Did Miller once knit a scarf for Bill Brumsickle's Christmas stocking?

no one else applies for District 2 seat

Update: Well, the person who told me about it told me wrong. Happens, I guess.

The ESD deadline passed Friday April 25th, with only John Keeffe, Paul Parker, and Theresa Tsou again filling out applications for the vacant seat on the Olympia School Board. Up next: the ESD collects materials, irons out the process, and then interviews candidates in a public meeting, tentatively scheduled for May 14.

For those hoping for a return of the fabled Kevin Douglas Donahoe, sorry.

Olympia School District notes

• ESD 113 is now taking applications for the District 2 seat the Olympia School Board failed to fill, but only until Friday, April 25th. If you'd like to join John Keeffe, Paul Parker, and Theresa Tsou in seeking candidacy, better act fast.
• With the passage of Resolution 440, the RIF process has officially begun, but it's in exploratory stages, as the Board and school and District administrators crunch the numbers. Until we know how many teachers are leaving or retiring, it's all up in the air. Staff on one-year contacts will find out their status by May 15th. Added: Beth Scouller estimates that 8 teachers are retiring, and another 25 or so are on 1-year or retire/rehire contracts. Right there, assuming a cost of $50,000 per member to the District, we have over $1.5 million in potential savings if those positions aren't refilled. (The only problem: already big class sizes would get bigger.)
  
• The Board voted 3-0, Carolyn Barclift abstaining, to send the Barclift legal controversy to an objective auditor. The Olympian describes the situation--which I'll admit I've been too busy to follow--here.
• The District, hoping to make the process of selecting a student representative a bit more equitable, is putting the election on a rotation, starting with Avanti in 2008, then going to Capital in 2009 and Olympia in 2010. (For the record, Olympia's current envoy, Adam Buchholz, has acquitted himself quite well.) I'm glad to see that Avanti will actually have a chance at representation.
  

ESD 113 Board re-opens applicant pool

This is how I spend my spring break: watching the ESD 113 Board eat lunch. Oh, and discuss important business, including two new agenda items addressing the Olympia School District's inability to fill its District 2 seat, vacated when Rich Nafziger abruptly resigned.

After all the experience watching the Olympia School Board go through 2007 Election II: Son of Rancor, it's somewhat surprising to see people having reasonable, non-fractious discussions of ongoing issues. (It's also good for one's perspective to remember that the Olympia School District is only one of many in the region--at present, our problems pale in comparison to the struggles of North Thurston, the district that's praying its scaled-back levy passes in May.)

The tables are arranged in a horseshoe facing a projector screen, and observers--Olympian reporter Venice Buhain, a teacher from McClane Elementary, myself, and a few ESD staffers, and Marilee Scarbrough, Policy and Legal Services director for the WSSDA--sit in a horseshoe outside the horseshoe. Vice Chair John Gott says that this is because the Board wasn't expecting visitors, and jokes, "We can put your chairs in the center if you like."

The initial informal debate: whether Kansas won, or Memphis lost, the national championship. That settled, the meeting commences at 12:09.

Out of kindness, the Board moves to discuss the additions earlier than their standard agenda position. The first, a proposed amendment to Policy 1250. The amendment reads,

Candidates submitted by the local school board members will be considered for appointment. In addition the ESD 113 Board of Directors may solicit and consider additional candidates as it may find to be appropriate.... from a pool of qualified candidates by majority vote.

Given the next item on the agenda, this is certain to be adopted after the second reading.

Up next: the Action Item, the detailed process for appointing a local director when the usual process fails. The discussion here livens up a bit. Dr. Bill Keim notes that the last time the ESD had to step in, it wasn't because of conflict, but because of a lack of applicants. There's brief talk of declaring an emergency, given the urgency of the budget problems facing the Olympia School District, but that won't be considered until later.

If you've been reading The Olympian's comment boards, you'd think there was a grand conspiracy among the "good old boys" (and a girl) to ensure that John Keeffe is the heir apparent to Nafziger's throne. That's deflated quickly in the meeting. Remember what I wrote above about perspective? The Board Members--who, for better or worse, come from other districts--haven't been following the controversy. Dr. Keim, remarking on the Olympia School Board's wrangling, says on multiple occasions, "We don't know what their process was." He mistakenly thinks that the only candidate dropped from consideration, Kevin Douglas Donahoe, quit when he heard the position wasn't paid. (Donahoe was voted out unanimously in a rare moment of solidarity.) Various ESD Board members don't even know if all the candidates are interested in continuing.

Even more deflating to the conspiracy theorists: Howard Coble, Olympia's rep, is the one who moves to open up the applicant pool again, advertising it as soon as possible. His words:

I think we have a very important responsibility to the Olympia School District to choose a candidate that best serves their needs. In doing so, we want to help them solve some of the divisiveness and move back together. I would argue for advertising for additional candidates as a backup, and not be limited to those three people that were considered.

Motion passes. So much for the automatic Keeffe ascendancy.

After a brief discussion over some of the finer points, John Gott makes a motion:

It seems to me that we need to have a very carefully thought out plan for conducting these interviews, and to that end I would like to have the following Board members constitute a subcommittee to wrestle that problem and get us prepared to do that. Dean Winner (former Director), Bill Brumsickle (former principal), and Howard Coble (OSD rep) to develop a system for us to use in interviewing these candidates that would assure that we are objective and fair and evenhanded in our consideration of the candidates.

Winner notes that he's going to be out of the country after April 30th, so things would have to move quickly. "To the best of my knowledge, sir, you are not excused," says Gott, to general laughter.

And, with that, the wheels are in motion. All previous predictions are moot; we don't even know who will comprise the final pool of applicants. At least the ESD Board recognizes the importance of moving quickly, openly, and fairly. We'll see if they can get the job done.


Tentative Dates
Monday, April 14: The ESD will verify that the position is unfilled, and request contact information for those still in the running.

Wednesday, 4/16: Post the invitation to all qualified and interested parties in the district, including the three remaining candidates.

April 25th: Deadline for applicants to submit their information to the ESD.

May 2nd: Arrange interviews.

May 14th, 10:00 a.m.: Interviews around noon. Executive session, then concluding in business session, and, hopefully, selection of an applicant.

breaking: Board chooses no one; decision goes to ESD

The Olympia School Board deadlocked again, and, unless a miracle occurs, the decision rests with ESD 113's board of directors.

I'm certain The Olympian will publish a summary, with all the quotes; I was feeling too analytical, too reflective to liveblog.

Little changed between Thursday and today. Both sides held their positions, Frank Wilson and Carolyn Barclift refusing to name a second choice, Russ Lehman and Bob Shirley calling for compromise. At the impasse, Lehman and Shirley voted against a motion to send the list of three candidates to the ESD, and the matter ended with adjournment at 3:24.

Free of charge:

Shirley gave a five minute lecture on the proper role of the Board, Lehman accused Wilson and Barclift of merely paying lip service to diversity, and Barclift ended a sentence with "I'm not gonna go there." When Wilson said the Board should quit wasting time, and that the ESD could make a "good decision," Shirley asked him point-blank why the Board couldn't just do the same itself. Overall, there was enough general orneriness that you might think you'd walked into a church's choir practice.

What happens next? Word is the ESD Board, hamstrung by Policy 1250, which says it has to request a slate of candidates chosen "by majority vote" from the local Board, will have to amend its procedures and choose whoever they prefer. (This process usually gets frustrated when no one steps up.) Once April 13, the ultimate local deadline, passes, the ESD has to find a replacement for the District 2 seats "in a timely manner," which means whenever.

I'm disappointed, not so much by the outcome, which at times seemed inevitable, but by the failures in the process. The personality conflicts and political wrangling were no surprise to anyone who followed this fall's election, but if the Board had a preferential, rather than simple "majority rules" decision in a three-way contest, we may have already reached agreement, politics aside.

May. Also the name of the earliest month this affair might be settled--and when the district will send out word that, if it has to, it'll make a RIF list. After all, that budget shortfall isn't getting any shorter.


Update: The Olympian's summary, which gets some of it right, is posted.

wherein this pundit predicts the outcome of this afternoon's School Board meeting

The odds:

2:1 Goes to the ESD.
8:1 Theresa Tsou is chosen.
8:1 Paul Parker is chosen.
1000:1 John Keeffe gets the nod.

If I were a betting man--and trust me, I'm not--I'd put my money on Tsou first, ESD second, Parker third.

breaking: Olympia School Board fails again

At 7:10 Thursday night, the Board reconvened out of executive session to once again publicly debate its choices for the District 2 seat, a debate that once again ended in a 2-2 deadlock.

Reading a prepared statement, Frank Wilson moved to select John Keeffe, citing his past Board experience and advocacy. Bob Shirley, saying "It's time to give someone else a turn," voted against. Lehman reiterated his opposition as well.

Carolyn Barclift, also reading a prepared statement, described Lehman's previous denigration of Keeffe's experience as "conjecture, based on a lack of knowledge." She spent several minutes outlining Keeffe's contributions during his 12-year tenure. She also cited the will of the voters, noting that her constituents far and away supported Keeffe as the best choice.

The motion failed, as the lines drawn at the last meeting held. Student representative Adam Buchholz noted that the decision was vital, and that experience wasn't the only indicator of future Board success.

Bob Shirley then moved to choose Paul Parker, his second choice. Lehman cited Parker's experience on the Budget Advisory Group. Wilson said he would vote no, since, compared to Parker, Keeffe would be able to "hit the ground running." The motion failed.

Lehman then moved for his second choice, Theresa Tsou, Shirley's first choice, again noting that adding her would diversify the Board, and strengthen its approach to important issues in math and science. Wilson noted that if he were voting in an election, he'd have only one choice, and again voted no; Barclift followed, motion failed.

Barclift wondered if the Board would like to meet again in a special session; Shirley said that he'd be willing, but didn't see how going over the qualifications again would change his mind. Wilson echoed this sentiment, as did Buchholz and Barclift. Lehman said that it's still worth one more meeting, "In the off chance that someone will change their mind."

That said, the Board decided to meet once more at 3:00 p.m. on Sunday, April 6.

Earlier this evening, applicants Keeffe, Theresa Tsou, and Paul Parker had come by at 6:30, only to hear that the Board, in an unsurprising move, would move to executive session for a half hour.

Carolyn Barclift came down first, at 7:07, alone. "I figured I'd come down and give you a start," she said, as her tiny audience laughed. For a moment, this blogger hoped, even minutely, that a decision had been reached. Alas.

special meeting moved to Thursday, April 3

Originally scheduled for April 2, the Olympia School Board's special meeting to (hopefully) appoint a replacement for Rich Nafziger has been moved to Thursday, April 3, at 6:30 p.m., The Olympian reports.

This means I won't be able to attend and liveblog, but since it's likely that the meeting will be held in a closed session, it wouldn't matter much anyway.

April 13 is still the ultimate deadline for the Board to find a District 2 director. After that, what'll happen? Only Nostradamus knows.

Olympia School Board fails to choose replacement

After a brief and at times acrimonious debate [mp3], the Olympia School Board couldn't settle on an applicant for the District 2 position, vacated when Rich Nafziger resigned earlier this year.

The meeting opened at 6:32 as Russ Lehman, who had been felled by a stroke, returned, taking his seat to healthy applause. All three applicants and about twenty audience members attended.

The Board decided to have an open discussion, and started debate when Bob Shirley nominated Theresa Tsou, citing her expertise and the diversity she would bring to the Board. His motion rallied no support.

Lehman then nominated Paul Parker, noting his work on the Budget Advisory Group and his progressive vision. Shirley voted in favor, but Frank Wilson and Barclift voted against.

That left John Keeffe for consideration. Wilson mentioned his extensive previous experience on the Board and his focus on "the kids." The first member to specifically criticize an applicant was Shirley, who said he couldn't square that with Keeffe's previous statements about the opening being "right for him right now." Shirley characterized Keefe's attitude as self-centered.

Lehman, responding to Wilson, said, "Certainly no one who's on the Board more than a year should ever say it's about the kids." He described Keeffe's career on the Board as ineffective, saying, "It's unbelievable what little has been accomplished in those twelve years."

Wilson and Barclift, speaking strongly in Keeffe's favor, said their minds were made up, and voted for him, but the two votes weren't enough. Frustrated with the sharp dialogue, student representative Adam Buchholz described the resulting impasse as "kind of ridiculous," urging the Board to reconsider compromise.

Eventually, the Board voted to meet again on April 2, in closed session, to discuss the applicants. If they cannot reach a decision, representatives from ESD 113 will choose Nafziger's replacement.

The meeting adjourned at 6:59.




I'll add more should any of the applicants return my request for a comment. The Olympian's brief initial recap is here.

Update: Paul Parker writes, "With three capable and qualified candidates before them, it will be disappointing if the Board cannot find a way to make the decision and move ahead."

Ironically, Parker's most vocal supporter on the Board, Russ Lehman, doesn't share Parker's view, describing the other primary applicant*, John Keeffe, as ineffective in the past and wrong for the Board right now, spouting clichés instead of substance in his public appearances. Lehman's hardline approach might have sunk Parker's bid, unfortunately, by pushing Keeffe's supporters away from a potential compromise.

Near the close of the meeting, Frank Wilson publicly expressed willingness to listen to Shirley and Lehman's side, though, so things may turn out in the end. If they don't, the decision falls on the ESD's Board, at which point the outcome is anyone's guess.



*Theresa Tsou gained only one vote to Parker's and Keeffe's two, though Lehman listed her as his second choice. Three votes are needed for a majority. The student representative's vote is symbolic.

to choose a Board member: March 19 liveblog

Update: The podcast is available [mp3]. See an addendum below.

6:27
Will they be able to decide? After this week's chiding by The Olympian, maybe the Board will be extra-officious this evening, and settle amicably on an applicant. I'll be liveblogging, whether they do or don't.

6:30
Lahmann, Barclift, Wilson, Shirley, and student rep Buchholz are here. Barclift announces that Russ Lehman is (hopefully) arriving soon, and we'll wait for him to show.

And he does! Smiling, to applause, Lehman takes his seat, and Barclift calls the meeting to order. Here we go.

6:33
The first question: should we go in public, or take it to an executive session? Lehman and Shirley say let's take it public. Buchholz worries that something said tonight might potentially start a conflict later; his call for executive session is seconded by Barclift, who doesn't want to talk about qualifications in public.

6:35
As Barclift polls the Board about their public/private preference, but Lehman, thinking it's a different kind of poll, says his preferred candidate is Paul Parker.

6:36
Shirley makes the first official motion, seconded by Lehman, to choose Theresa Tsou. He gives a brief speech about her passion for the underprivileged and the struggling.

Lehman says that Tsou would be a good candidate, both as a woman, as an immigrant, and as a PhD, but that he'll still vote for Paul Parker.

First vote: 1-3 for Tsou. Not yet. Lehman then moves to nominate Paul Parker.

6:40
Lehman talks about Parker's experience and attitude, especially concerning the budget, which Lehman sees as the big issue in coming months. Parker's work on the Budget Advisory Group matters a great deal.

Shirley says he's willing to vote for Parker (who's sitting in the third row).

Wilson favors John Keeffe's experience.

Second vote: 2-2 for Parker. Not yet.

6:43
Wilson speaks in favor of Keeffe because of his experience and his focus--putting kids at the center.

Barclift agrees.

Shirley notes that Keeffe's description of his feeling that joining the Board would be "right for him right now," was putting his own fulfillment first. Wasn't convinced.

Lehman says that "John's experience is exactly what we don't need right now." "Certainly no one who's on the Board more than a year should ever say it's about the kids.... John said how the Board would serve him, not how he would serve the Board." "It's unbelievable what little has been accomplished in those 12 years."

"I'm absolutely not willing for John."

Wilson disagrees sharply, saying that it really is about the kids. Shirley agrees that it is, but doesn't see that as Keefe's focus.

The vote: 2-2. No agreement, then.

6:48
With the failure of all three motions, Barclift asks if anyone's mind might be changeable as the Board considers the next move.

Lehman says he'll consider anyone but Keeffe.

Sparks continue to fly, as Barclift says, "Russ, quite honestly, you don't believe anyone on this Board has done anything worthwhile."

6:50
Shirley: "I think two of us have expressed a willingness to compromise."

Buchholz: "This is kind of ridiculous. The first thing about conflict resolution that anyone learns is compromise, that no one is going to get everything they want."

6:54
Shirley says that to turn over the decision to the ESD would be a "failure." Wilson says he's willing to listen. Barclift says that Buchholz may one day learn when compromise is just not possible. His quick reply: "I guess I'm just too young to understand."

Barclift wants any potential discussion taken to an executive session.

6:57
Buchholz breaks a long silence by asking if the Board can go to executive session as a way to work through the impasse. That meeting will come April 2nd, a "special meeting" not open to the public.

The meeting adjourns at 6:59.


Addendum, 3/20: Comparing my quotes with the podcast, I was only slightly off; for example, where Russ Lehman says "what we don't need now," I put it as "What we don't need right now."

Although the pro got the words exactly right, her piece misses Lehman's comment, in bold below, that appeared to set Wilson and Barclift on edge. The context:

The term that I served with John, well, just look at some of the answers to his questions, and for being on the Board twelve years, the first answer to the question, What should the Board be about?, it's about the kids, well, that's a cliché that everybody says, and certainly nobody who's been on the Board more than a year should ever say it's about the kids, as the sole answer to the question, Why be on the Board?

With Lehman and Shirley dead set against Keeffe, his chance of joining the Board is pretty slim--only if the ESD has to step in, or only if Shirley or Lehman takes a Damascus road trip. I'd put 2:1 odds on Parker, 4:1 on Tsou.

comparison of coverage: 5/17 vs. The Daily O.

This morning's Olympian has a report on last night's OSD applicant forum titled "Candidates offer philosophies." Compare my liveblog and recap. Read each before you consider my critique, and note that this isn't (just) a chance to trumpet New Media values, but a kindly suggestion to the paper of Olympia's record to deepen and expand its education coverage.

Let's look at the pluses and minuses to see why and how.


Minus: If you're scanning the headlines, expect confusion. Candidates? For what? This isn't an election. The Board will choose one of the three applicants by majority vote of its four members, or, failing that, the ESD will handpick one. Though their educational philosophies were asked for and presented, the article itself doesn't list them.

Plus: My question about extracurricular activities makes the cut. Obviously, the writer and editor have good taste in interrogation tactics.

Plus: The article's summary of the backstory is concise. However, this also becomes a...

Minus: Lots is missing. No word from the article, for example, that the process could potentially fail, and the ESD would have to step in

Minus: There's no other analysis. Are the candidates substantively different? There's no mention of Tsou's "data driven" style, or her call for diversity, or unguarded moments. There's no discussion of the lone applause line (which John Keeffe delivered). There's no link to Parker's fundraising mustache, obvious and credible evidence of his community activism.

Most important, there's not mention of the tiny turnout.

I think most of the minuses can be explained by the demands of newsprint. When you have a set column space to work with, you have to skim and selectively quote, get the gist and move on, quickly. And, to be fair, the paper covers a wide range of issues for three major districts. Lord knows we can't get perfect depth on every single one.

Maybe it's time to really make something of the new medium, Olympian. You have a blog: now start linking to local bloggers. Teachers with no real free time Livebloggers are bruising their metacarpals filling in the gaps. For free. Take advantage.

Olympia School Board applicant forum recap

Twenty people showed up to ask fifteen questions of three applicants for the District 2 seat. On average, how many times did the words "difficult," "listening," "students," "sustainable," and "experience" appear in each answer? Show your work.

Okay, pencils down.

All in all, an interesting two hours (blogged in more detail here) as Theresa Tsou, Paul Parker, and John Keeffe fielded questions from the audience, mediated by Peter Rex, the District's communication director.

One common theme: the importance of bringing all stakeholders to the table when making some pretty tough decisions about the current budget crisis, which was described as "difficult," "not easy," and "painful" throughout the evening. The more I think about it, the more I am impressed that these three have come forward.

Tsou again focused on the diversity she could bring to the Board, and emphasized narrowing the achievement gap for disadvantaged students, a subject that caused her to become a little emotional at several points.

Parker took the most charged approach to a question about the Board's division, questioning its premise that the schism is based on issues rather than on process. He mentioned his experience working with different partisan groups, reaching across the aisle to reach compromise or consensus.

Keeffe emphasized his previous experience, and mentioned time and again just how difficult the upcoming budget battle would be. He said he would listen to all points of view, and make the decision he thought best for the students. In his words, "Consensus is wonderful, but decisions are also important."

The audience was mostly quiet throughout, with only a brief moment of applause from a corner of the room when Keeffe mentioned the importance of civility in the Board's interactions.

If Russ Lehman is able to return to health within the coming weeks, the Board may be able to choose Nafziger's replacement by its preferred deadline of March 19. If no decision is made by April 13, the decision goes upstairs to ESD 113, which sent one of its Board members to watch the proceedings tonight.

As I see it, the Board has the advantage of three strong remaining choices. The upside is that they can't make a truly wrong decision. The downside is that the decision will be just that much harder to make.

I'll post an analysis of The Olympian's writeup as soon as it appears. Old media takes time.

Olympia School Board applicant forum liveblog

6:23
The wireless is up, which means this'll be a liveblog. Oh boy!

First panelist to arrive: John Keeffe, followed closely by Theresa Tsou. Carolyn Barclift is the first Board member, in at 6:23. Bob Shirley comes at 6:25. One more and we have a quorum. Frank Wilson's here at 6:28. Here we go. (Adam Buchholz, the student rep, is here. Absent: Russ Lehman, who is still recovering from a recent stroke, and who we hope can return shortly.)

6:29
Paul Parker, last of the panelists, is here. Peter Rex, the District's communication director, will take questions written on blue 3x5 cards, and read them to the panelists. Since I've lost my voice, I just might take advantage.

6:32
Barclift explains the process: panelists get 3 minutes to open and close, and 3 minutes answer any particular question. Theresa Tsou will speak first, followed by Paul Parker, with John Keeffe concluding.

14 19 folks have shown up to listen and ask questions.

I should note: questions and answers are paraphrased. When the podcast is available, you'll be able to fact-check me. [Update: and here it is.]

6:40
Each applicant begins by speaking about their families and their connections to the community. Their priorities:

Tsou: PhD in science = hopes to strengthen our math and science education. Hopes to diversify the Board, as she's said before.

Parker: Bring people together. Budget. (Cites experience on the Budget Advisory Group.) Implement the Strategic Plan.

Keeffe: Sees this as an opportunity to work at the intersection of community and government.

6:44
The first question: Do you have children in the District? How does that your affect your role on the Board?

Parker, when asked about his familial connection to the District and how it would affect his Board role, gets a good laugh when he talks about growing a mustache for Roosevelt's Moustache-a-thon. Pictures here. (More seriously, he wants to visit the different schools across the District, to really see how they operate.)

Keeffe is the only applicant whose kids no longer attend District schools. He notes that 80% of District constituents don't have children in schools, so his present family status shouldn't be a hindrance to his "kid-centered" focus.

Tsou's voice breaks as she talks about the gap between low-income and higher-income students' success; she says that she doesn't just see her own kids, but "everybody's kids."

6:49
Next question: This appears to be a divided board on many issues. How will you handle being the swing vote?

Keeffe, Tsou give nearly identical answers: they'll vote based on what they think is right, what's best for the students.

Parker is different: he thinks the differences are more about process than issues. Cites his experience working with partisan groups, bringing different sides together.

6:53
Paraphrased question: some issues brought to the Board have some "intensity" behind them, which gets reflected in the press. How will you deal with this?

Tsou: Talks about the importance of communication. Sincerely listening is the first step.

Parker: Like Tsou, notes that parents who come to speak to the Board show just how much they care. All stakeholders--parents, administrators, teachers--care a great deal about the kids. Boards have to make the tough decisions.

Keeffe: Once again, listening comes first. Mentions the disagreement about closing Rogers Elementary (this gets a smile from Frank Wilson, who opposed the decision). Wants to reach out to everyone, even those who don't come.

6:59
How will your experience help you in making a decision about the science curriculum?

Parker: Science is fun. I'd want to hear all points of view, and then make a decision. I'm "comfortable" with science, but "I'm not the professional."

Keeffe: Pay particular attention to those who will use the curriculum. Without their expertise, it won't be anything great. "I'm not a science major, but I'd work really hard to understand [the curriculum]."

Tsou: "I'm a scientist, so the first thing I'd do is gather data." (I'm not surprised by this answer; she struck me early on as "data driven.") Sees the state requirements as a floor, not a ceiling.

7:04
"Please describe your educational philosophy, and how this will affect your role as a Board member."

Keeffe: A well-rounded education allowing students to explore many places. Allowing all students to be successful.

Tsou: Start with the basics--math, reading, science. Character-building is "even more important than knowledge."

Parker: Learning happens all the time. We have to teach students to "learn how to learn, and enjoy it." All children learn differently, in different ways.

Both Keeffe and Parker mention the importance of extra-curricular activities, the subject of my now-extraneous question.

7:10
"What is the proper relationship between the Board and the administration and teachers?" (The woman behind me whispers, "That's a good question." It's also one each had time to answer last week.)

Tsou: Not to micromanage, but to provide leadership.

Parker: Listening, leadership, vision. Provides direction to the District staff "with the Superintendent," and responds to the parents.

Keeffe: It's collaborative. The primary goal is to create an environment where all students can succeed.

7:15
"Why do you feel there's such a low turnout for this opportunity for community members to meet you and ask questions?"

Parker: People are pretty busy. I don't know how much awareness there is--this isn't a campaign, with "yard signs out all over the place."

Keeffe: I can't second-guess people's motivations, although some might be pretty trusting that the process will work out okay.

Tsou: The short turnaround time for the announcement might be to blame. Also, some parents don't necessarily know what the Board does, or how the Board is involved in their students' education. This is especially true among immigrant families.

7:19
"As a member of School Board, what will you be able to point to as your greatest accomplishment after your first year?"

Keeffe: Wouldn't really be "my" accomplishment, but I'd hope we can have a stabilized budget, so we can "take a breath" and look at the other "pressure that are out there."

Tsou: Narrowing the achievement gap, or at least having a practical strategy for narrowing the gap.

Parker: "As a team... we sat down together to set priorities... to develop a sustainable process to solve the ongoing structural budget issues that we have."

7:24
"Give an example of a difficult situation, and how you built consensus within the group. In other words, describe your leadership style."

Tsou: First, listen. Then gather facts.

Parker: Recognize that different people have different needs. Identify the needs and desired outcomes, and "then it's a lot easier to find solutions that work for everybody."

Keeffe: Sometimes the Board won't get consensus, but we're going to make sure that "everybody gets their chance" to be heard, and to understand the process. "Consensus is wonderful, but decisions are also important."

7:29
"The budget faces a large shortfall. How do you decide between worthy but competing programs, when not all can be sustained?"

Parker: If we have "all the right people at the table," we can find novel ways to solve these difficult programs without having to eliminate programs.

Keeffe: Cutting $2 million won't be easy or pleasant. Our paramount consideration is the "core mission of the District." We'll go looking for "cuts across everything."

Tsou: In my experience, budget cuts have forced greater efficiency. Agrees with Keeffe that we have to "minimize the impacts on student learning."

7:36
I thought it'd already been answered, but Peter Rex asks my question anyway: "How important are extracurricular activities, such as music, drama, or debate, for our District's success?"

Keeffe: Students are most engaged by these activities. If we lose these activities, we risk losing students. They're "terribly important."

Tsou: Basic education, basic knowledge "is what sustained me today." Sometimes students have "too much fun" these days--their main responsibility is to learn.

Parker: We need to focus on efficiency, so we don't think about cutting programs, but about more effectively doing what's best for students.* (But see below for Parker's clarification of my paraphrase.)

7:42
"How should the District deal with difficult family situations, such as abuse or poverty?"

Tsou: This subject is again emotional for Tsou, whose voice breaks as she admits that she doesn't have a strategy, but that this is one of her top priorities.

Parker: Our District has to do more than just teach--we have to provide resources not only from the District, but from the wider community.

Keeffe: We have to identify these students as early as possible.

7:48
"How would you convince the public that you're objective on the issues, and not seeking the office for a personal agenda?"

Parker: People who know me know I'm fair and a hard worker.

Keeffe: To ensure the success of all students and to be respectful.

Tsou: I don't have a personal agenda. This isn't about personal gain; I'll have to sacrifice family time and time from my own life. Extending education to all students for a better future for our whole society.

7:53
"How would you describe the benefits of an interdisciplinary studies methodology as opposed to a separation of separate curriculum areas?"

Keeffe gets a laugh by mentioning his recent degree from Evergreen. It's more "real world" to learn the why and the how together.

Tsou: The basic skills have to come first to provide a foundation for interdisciplinary endeavors.

Parker: It's beneficial to experience, but not necessarily best for all students, or best for all teachers.

8:00
"As a Board member, how will you work civilly, as a good example for the community?"

Tsou, Parker, and Keeffe all emphasize the importance of respect and listening. Parker is a little concerned that there hasn't been enough communication about the budget process. Keeffe gets scattered applause by quoting from the Strategic Plan, and saying that the Board has to model that behavior.

8:04

Closing statements.

Paul Parker: My ability and experience dealing with contentious issues makes me an ideal candidate in these difficult times, when communication is especially important. We need a new perspective on organizing our budget so it can be sustainable, and still meet the needs of all stakeholders.

John Keeffe: We need to "enhance the partnerships" among the Board, teachers, administators, and the community, so everyone can be involved in this difficult process. My previous Board experience makes me especially ready for this time.

Theresa Tsou: We need to ensure that the needs of all students are met. I hope to show the same level of care for all students, especially the disadvantaged, that I have shown for my own children.

8:11
And we're done. A recap follows soon. is available here.


*Via email, Paul Parker writes,

I think you will find that I began my response to your question about extra-curricular activities by stating how important they are to students, their parents and teachers. But they are always the first items put on the chopping block. Within that context, I then made my pitch that we stop talking about cuts. If we keep developing and revising the budget as we always have, sports, drama, etc. will be the first to go. Instead, my suggestion is -- let's do things differently.

It's not necessarily about "efficiency." Let's agree on what is important, what we need to do (both what to continue to do and what we need to start doing) then figure out how to do it within the resources available. Peter Hutchinson is the theorist behind this approach -- arguing convincingly to me that "traditional budget cutting focuses entirely more on what we cut (or hide), while ignoring what we keep. It does little to improve the effectiveness of the 85 or 90 percent of tax dollars that continue to be spent. It never broaches the question of how to maximize the value of the tax dollars we do collect." Osborne and Hutchinson, The Price of Government, page 5.

I thank Paul for writing in to clarify his philosophy of funding. More about Osborne and Hutchinson's work here.

who is John Keeffe?

This is the third in a three-part series*, introducing you to the three applicants for the District 2 seat on the Olympia School Board, which was vacated when Rich Nafziger resigned.

The series goes in reverse alphabetical order, wrapping up before March 12, when the candidates will face questions in a "community forum environment."

A longtime Olympia resident, John Keeffe is the only current applicant with previous Board experience, having served from 1991 to 2003. He knows firsthand how difficult the job is, so why would he want to come back, especially when the district faces tough times? In his own words (via email):

I created a job resume recently and I thought a lot about what my passion was in relation to work I wanted to do. I found that the place that would give me the most satisfaction is a job that is at the intersection of government and the public. The 12 years I was on the Board previously, as well as the 30 years I worked for the Post Office, and my work with Parking Services allowed me to be in that intersection in a number of different ways. The School Board was in some ways the most rewarding because it was all about kids. When Rich left the Board and the position became available I thought about whether I could or wanted to do it again. After a lot of internal dialogue, and conversations with family and friends, I felt that this was a place that fit my job goal and where I could have a positive impact in my community.

Among other things, in his remarks to the Board on March 5th, Keeffe lists concerns about graduation requirements: taken individually, the WASL, Culminating Project, and extra math requirements might be worthy, but when taken together, they endanger electives, which Keeffe regards as essential for a well-rounded high school education.

Keeffe sees the current budget crisis as an opportunity to prioritize district spending in line with our strategic plan, and a time to scale back expectations for growth. He also believes that, along with its local obligations, the Board should advocate for change at the state level.

You can listen to Keefe's opening statement starting at 6:05 in [mp3]. His answers to specific questions are interspersed among those of the other applicants.




*A fourth, Kevin Douglas Donahoe, has already been removed from consideration.

Kevin Douglas Donahoe nixed from applicant list

The current Board has unanimously voted to cut Kevin Douglas Donahoe from its list of applicants, The Olympian reports.

Donahoe wasn't at the meeting; his answers to the questions that were submitted to all of the candidates were shown on a video.

He told the district in an e-mail that he submitted the video to accommodate for a disability....

In his video, Donahoe, a software engineer, emphasized the role of technology in the operation of the school district and said he encouraged the use of Web sites such as YouTube and Second Life in governing and learning experiences.

I have a feeling that Donahoe was already at a distinct disadvantage; read his self-styled job description for the position, and you'll see that his idiosyncratic perspective just doesn't jibe with the status quo. I just don't think we're ready for virtual board members.

I had meant to include Donahoe in my series introducing the applicants. I should note that he was the only one out of the four who never returned my email.

who is Paul Parker?

This is the second in a four-part series, introducing you to the four applicants for the District 2 seat on the Olympia School Board, which was vacated when Rich Nafziger resigned.

The series will go in reverse alphabetical order, and will wrap up before March 12, when the candidates will face questions in a "community forum environment."

I've made care to accurately quote or represent the candidates, and any potential errors are my own.



Paul Parker lives down the street from Jill Johnson, one of my colleagues at Capital. "Paul's hard-working, thoughtful, and smart," she told me over lunch on Tuesday. "Thorough, too." The only applicant with a law degree, Parker has worked in higher education and state government, and currently serves as a senior policy analyst for Washington State's Transportation Commission.

More to the point, Parker is an active PTA and Site Council member, and chaired the district's Budget Advisory Group in 2007. Last June, after examining the district's finances, the group advocated some cuts that, to paraphrase Parker, "washed out" with paired with recommended expenses.

Parker and other advisory group members who attended an Olympia School Board study session Monday said they think the group would need more information about the district’s entire budget to make decisions about how to make additional cuts. Traditionally, the group has strictly focused on potential cuts and additions proposed by district staff.

Parker's role, as the committee title should make clear, was strictly advisory. Should he join the Board, he'll have the unenviable chance to make cuts firsthand, since we still face at least a $1.5 million shortfall in the coming year.

When it comes to policy recommendations, Parker has three specific goals for the district:

• Encourage more students to study world languages such as Spanish and Chinese and be proficient in them by the time of graduation;
• Prepare more students for careers in science and technology, either in college or in the workforce; and
• Provide students more exposure and hands‐on experience with fine arts.

You can read Parker's resume and a brief purpose statement here [pdf].

who is Theresa Tsou?

This is the first in a four-part series, introducing you to the four applicants for the District 2 seat on the Olympia School Board, which was vacated when Rich Nafziger resigned.

The series will go in reverse alphabetical order, and will wrap up before March 12, when the candidates will face questions in a "community forum environment."

I've made care to accurately quote or represent the candidates, and any potential errors are my own.



Parent activist Theresa Tsou is ready to bring her scientific expertise and data-driven approach to the Olympia School Board. A Ph.D. holder and groundfish expert, Dr. Tsou is known in the community for volunteer and committee work, and for her role in the opposing the "Connected Math" curriculum that was adopted last year.

"I don't think the data supports that CMP2 is a better curriculum than Glencoe," said Tsou, who has children in third, fifth and eighth grades.

Tsou also is worried about several drops in math WASL scores this spring among sixth-graders. Of particular concern was a drop among low-income students as a whole, she said.

"Those students are disadvantaged students and usually don't get as much support from their families," Tsou said. "That's a big alarm to me."

Although Tsou was among parents who opposed the district's adoption of Connected Math, she said she wouldn't push district officials to reverse their decision at this point.

But she said she thinks it's important that all teachers supplement the Connected Math curriculum with materials that allow students to hone basic math skills.

Tsou's stated interests include providing "internationally compatible [math and science] education," diversifying the Board, and prioritizing budget cuts in a difficult time. She believes her experience managing Department of Fish and Wildlife budgets makes her particularly apt for the latter.

At this time, Dr. Tsou has declined to clarify or expand upon any items in her introductory letter to the Board, which can be read here [pdf].