Dear WSSDA President Kevin Laverty, 7-06-2010
I was shocked to see that WSSDA was filing an amicus brief in support of the Seattle School District's appeal of the 2-04-2010 Spector decision.
Such a filing would be a support for a Superintendent and Four directors who operate as oligarchs in a republic. I urge you and the WSSDA directors to look at all the facts surrounding the Spector decision and the SPS's appeal. {Decision and appeal briefs attached}
As a member of the public I believe that the public is entitled to the protections of State Law. If WSSDA files an amicus brief supporting the SPS in its Washington Appeals Court action, this brief will be supporting:
(1) a School Board's original exclusion of evidence and
(2) defiance of a court order requiring Seattle to include all the evidence, from an administrative transcript of evidence agreed upon by both parties , in remaking the decision.
As I say I am shocked that WSSDA has so little regard for the rights of the public.
The WSSDA amicus summary on the WSSDA website
Summary of Issues to be Appealed misses enormously important information:
#1 On May 6, 2009 the school directors made a decision based on evidence provided to the board by Holly Fergusen of approximately 1100 pages. The evidence considered did not include at least 300 pages sent to the board by the public, which was clearly excluded from the making of the 5-06-2009 decision.
#2 The District's attorney Shannon McMinimee in the original Superior Court action agreed with Porter et al. attorney Keith Scully that a supplemental transcript of evidence consisting of evidence provided by the public be added to the administrative record. The entire administrative record then consisted of more than 1400 pages.
#3 The Judge on 2-04-2010 issued an order of remand that stated:
The Board's decision to adopt the Discovering Series is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
#4 The Seattle School Board has consistently failed to satisfy the requirements of RCW 28A 645.020
Within twenty days of service of the notice of appeal, the school board, at its expense, or the school official, at such official's expense, shall file the complete transcript of the evidence and the papers and exhibits relating to the decision for which a complaint has been filed. Such filings shall be certified to be correct.
#5 WSSDA support of the SPS, a district that has yet to be able to file a "Certified Correct Transcript" on which any school board decision appealed in the last 18 months has been based, is extremely shocking. A much fuller explanation than that currently provided on the WSSDA website is definitely in order if WSSDA chooses to support a District that continually fails to follow state law in decision-making.
#6 It would be much more appropriate if WSSDA recommended to the SPS that they install a system that creates a proper transcript of the evidence and the papers and exhibits relating to the decision for which a complaint has been filed. This is a problem of significant size that WSSDA should address.
Sincerely,
Danaher M. Dempsey, Jr.
SBE Math Advisory Panelist
=============
Spector Decision 2-4-10District's Brief 5-21-10Porter et al Brief 6-21-10