I'm running for the Everett School Board!

Media Release

Contact:

KimGuymon
E-Mail: GuymonForEverettSchools@gmail.com

May 15, 2013

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Kim Guymon, Founder of Everett School BoardProject, runs for the Everett School Board Position 2

(Everett, WA)  What started out almost two years ago as a social media effort focused on creating change has now turned into a run for public office. After a series of issues that propelled the Everett School District and the Board of Directors to the front page of many regional newspapers for all the wrong reasons, Kim Guymon founded the Everett School Board Project, an online advocacy group of now 200+ people in the Everett area.   

The Everett School Board Project’s Facebook page and its companion blog has been part therapy, part sounding board, and part district news source for Kim, but though using social media to connect with the public is foreign to many, it is not for Kim Guymon, who spent almost 10 years leading an online community of retailers as a consultant in the photo industry.  But after working to create discussion and awareness around leadership priorities and challenges with the current Everett School Board, Kim has decided that more direct involvement is needed to help create needed change, and has filed to run for the #2 on the Everett School Board.

“When I started the Everett SchoolBoard Project, I didn’t do it with an eye to getting on the school board,” says newly minted Board candidate, Kim Guymon.  “I started it because I knew that there had to be other parents out there who were frustrated and needed a place to talk with each other. Those with concerns were often made to feel like the ‘lone wolf’ with the implication that no one else has ever spoken out – which is rarely true.  After two years of talking, listening and influencing, I decided it was time to get more even involved.”   

Kim doesn’t have the background that has come to be associated with many typical school board candidates.  Kim reports that  “Some people have expressed concern that school board members, as with other public officials, seem to often come from a tightly connected network of community organizations, where it appears that people run to improve their resume and to play the ‘you scratch my back, and I’ll scratch yours’ game.  That’s just not the world I come from, and certainly not the way I operate.”  Instead, Kim has spent much of the last 16 years raising her family.  This Fall she will have two sons, a junior and a freshman, in Everett public high schools, and like many other parents, much of her time and energy has been spent supporting her children’s education and school activities.  As with most parents, she has volunteered in the classroom, donated supplies, and attended fundraisers, concerts and sporting events.  She is currently a student herself through an online program at Brigham Young University and plans to graduate from BYU the same year her oldest son graduates from Cascade High School.  “One of my most important qualifications for this position is that I can relate to the concerns that students, families, and teachers have.  I understand the need to prioritize time and resources and to focus on where you can make the greatest impact”, she says. 

As a member of the Everett School Board, Kim plans to focus on 6 core principles:

 

• Lead with the students, teachers and families of the districts always in mind
• Set prudent financial management priorities that are student-focused
• Communicate with the public in the spirit of transparency and respect
• Respect the teachers who work tirelessly to prepare our students for success
• Seek innovative educational solutions that engage and excite our 21st century students
• Help create a positive educational environment that pushes Everett Schools to the top of the list

“I believe that School Board Directors are elected by the public to represent the interests of the public,” Guymon says.  “I think too many school board directors forget where they came from, and start prioritizing the interests of the administration and other groups that don’t always have a direct connection to students and learning.  I want to be part of an effort to refocus on the students, families and teachers of the district and make sure their needs are met and their efforts supported.”

Further information on Kim Guymon’s campaign for Everett School Board Position #2 will be found at www.kimguymon.com. 

One of these things is not like the others....

Remember this Sesame Street Game?

Well, we're going to play it on this blog today.  Afterall, it IS educational. Look carefully at the top photo and tell me which one of those things are NOT like the others.  I'll wait

Okay, ready?  If you guessed that ALL THE OTHER SCHOOL BOARD SEATS are for a 4 year term and EVERETT School Board seats are for a SIX year term, then YOU WIN!

The question is, "Why?"   We are one of just THREE districts in the whole state who operate on 6 year terms.  I believe Spokane and Tacoma are the other two.  When Director Jessica Olson proposed a discussion regarding it (because the school board may change it with a vote, from what I understand), she was shot down and told that they NEEDED the term so they could really get up and going and have continuity.  Really?  Why do WE need six?  Are we not as bright?  Are we special?  Are we afraid of giving up our power and having to answer to the voters more often?  

Picture this - if you were elected to the school board the same Fall your child started Kindergarten, you wouldn't have to be accountable to the voters until they were in 5th grade.  If you were re-elected, you wouldn't have to face the voters again until they were Juniors in High School.  So, two terms on the Everett School Board spans nearly the entire school life of a child.  If you were elected the year your child was born and served just THREE terms, you would be on the board from birth to adulthood.  That. Is. Nuts.  

Conversely, under a 4 year plan, you would have to face the voters and be accountable THREE times in that same "school lifetime" time period and FOUR times in the "Birth to Adulthood" scenario.  That would give more people a chance to serve and more people the chance to change the face of the board and make more board members accountable for their actions.  

What does state law say about this?  School board elections must be held in odd-numbered (off) years and elections must be staggered, meaning you can only have a few up for re-election at a time.  That's it.  That's all it says about the issue of "how long".  

So, this Fall, Everett will have the opportunity to elect two new members of the school board.  According to the current schedule, in 2015, two more seats will be up for re-election and then in 2017, the member we elected in 2011 would be up.  But, you could simply add the 2011 member to the 2015 ballot and have THREE up for re-election.  It's really very simple.  She would have served 4 years at that point and the other two would have served 6 but will then start the 4 year cycle.  Then, the two elected this Fall would be up for re-election in 2017. It's really not that complicated, nor is it that disruptive to do.  

But, alas, what practically every other school board in the state manages to do in FOUR years, we need SIX to do.  Gotta keep hold of those seats as long as possible....  Facing the voters and being accountable is messy and unpleasant stuff (and makes the Superintendent NERVOUS).  

Quick Survey Regarding Length of Service for the School Board

Create your free online surveys with SurveyMonkey , the world's leading questionnaire tool.

QUICK Survey Regarding the Proposed Changes to the School Day

Create your free online surveys with SurveyMonkey , the world's leading questionnaire tool.

RECALL!!!

Rodman Reynolds, who has been very active in our group and was a candidate for school board a couple of years ago, has filed a recall petition against all 5 members of the Everett School Board.  

The Board has violated state law by not having an auditing committee to over-see the finances of the district.  

You can read the recall petitions HERE.  We are discussing it at our Facebook group HERE.  

The irony of this situation is that the Superintendent (Gary Cohn) has a finance background.  The Board president is a Pastor of a large Lutheran Church in Everett and is required by their governing body to have an auditing committee to oversee their finances.  The Board Vice President is a CPA and one of the other members runs a community Housing program which I am SURE has some sort of independent oversight of their finances.  It begs to be asked.... why is this idea lost on them?  I guess it's like so many others - they would rather fight against doing the right thing than actually do the right thing.  

The immediate response was to call an emergency meeting to find out if the ESD is going to pay the legal fees of the directors to protect them in their disregard for the law.   I assume the district's message to the public will be, "This man is taking precious resources out of the classroom to sue us."  No, this man is trying to make sure this district acts in accordance to the law.  

Rodman has filed a recall petition against the board president before that was denied.  But, I have a feeling this one will stick.  The Everett School Board is not above the law.  In fact, I checked with at least one other district about having an auditing committee and their response was, "Of course we do.  We legally have to have one."

On another note, the district also has decided to pretend like they haven't already decided to start elementary school 20 minutes later next year.  That means a 9:35 start and that kids will be walking home at nearly dusk at the other end since it will also end 20 minutes later.  In typical fashion, no actual parent seems to have been talked to regarding the change.  The "official" response received by one of my complaining friends was, "we also are touching base with child care providers, youth activity organizations, pediatricians, dentists -- those businesses and organizations whose schedules are impacted by school schedules."  HUH?  Apparently, they have no interest in touching base with the actual families who are impacted by this decision.  I know a lot of moms who already find it nearly impossible to get to work on time as it is.  A later start time means that money the district says they will save by doing this ($162,000 - which is about what the Superintendent makes), will merely be handed down to the families who may now have to pay for morning care for their small children.  

Just once in my lifetime would I like to see the Everett School District send out an email survey to parents.  My sister-in-law works at a district in Utah and she said that they REGULARLY send out email surveys to parents on changes like this.  But, again, that "right thing" concept seems to be lost on this group.  They would rather pretend that the shoulder slaps and friendly handshakes they get at Rotary is all the approval they need for any decision they make.   Talking to the public just gets messy....

Defining the Role of a School Board Director

Someone asked me the other day how I would define the role of a school board director.  It was a good question and after our initial discussion, I pondered it some more and decided to share my thoughts here.  

As I see it, the school board is elected from members of the general public in the district as representatives of the public.  Some districts have the district sectioned up and elect a board member from each section and often, one "at large" member.  That means that each section is represented, in theory, by someone who cares a lot about those neighborhoods and schools.  Everett just has general Directors from any part of the district.  The only requirement is pretty much that you live IN the district.  

Once a school board member is elected, I believe their number one obligation is to the public who sent them there with their vote.  In my mind, they should be in constant contact with the public.  If there is an important issue, they should reach out to the voters for feedback. Their own votes should be cast only after taking the pulse of the taxpayers, not based on some assumption or personal political agenda.  

It's so easy today to do this.  Decades ago, reaching out to the public meant phone calls, letters, paper surveys, expensive postage, time, etc.  Today, the district can reach out to every parent with an email address.  Yes, I know, there are more taxpayers than just parents in the district.  But, I am sure that for the purposes of the school board, a list could be set up of non-parent taxpayers who want to be informed about what the school district is doing with their money.  After all, 46% of all home-owner's property taxes go to fund schools in this state.  I have several neighbors without children in the schools, but I believe they should have say in the matter, too, since their dollars are there.  

But with social media and other tech advances, reaching out to the public is as easy as a few clicks of the mouse.  It took them a long time to start videoing the school board meetings.  Director Olson had requested it for over a year.  I believe they started mostly because SHE was videoing them from her own seat.  Suddenly, a camera quietly started appearing in the back corner of the room (of course no credit was given to her for the suggestion).  However, suggestions they involve high school students in web-casting them live was ignored.  

I am puzzled as to why our current School Board doesn't maintain a Facebook page.  Actually, I'm not THAT puzzled, because they seem to not want anything to do with social media.  One current Director called our group on Facebook, "Social Media Chatter" with a disdainful tone. I don't expect them to all take to Twitter, but come on - how hard is it to set up a Facebook page and allow people to hit "LIKE" to get updates?  They must believe their web page is user friendly and interactive.  It's not. Meeting reminders and links to agendas, minutes and videos showing up in Facebook feeds is a lot more user friendly and interactive.  The public doesn't know where to find this stuff so, if you truly want the public involved, you'll make it easy for them.  

Are they afraid of knowing what the public thinks?  I think so.  Director Jessica Olson has her own Facebook page and she has faced some uncalled-for attacks there.  But, for the most part, she is just sharing information and listening to the public - which should be the desire of the other 4 members of the board.  They represent the public, yet, at the same time, seem to not want to hear what the public thinks.  

The Everett School Board Project has our own Facebook page and with almost 200 parents and taxpayers over there, we often have good discussions about our schools.  I know the Everett School District (and the media) are paying attention, but none of them, except Director Olson, has chosen to participate in our discussion.  They most likely sit around mad because we are often critical.  But, if we feel like they aren't listening to us, what else are we supposed to do?  We feel like we have no voice in the people we elected to BE our voice and we all understand how easy it would be for them to connect with us.  Choosing not to sends a clear message.  

We must remember that these 5 people are all equally elected to represent the interests of the public with regards to the schools and to oversee the schools on behalf of the public.  They should be talking to the public and they should be asking the hard questions the public wants them to ask.  I am often dismayed to sit in a school board meeting and listen to a presentation about MSP scores or new programs, etc. and at the end of the presentation, when the directors are given the opportunity to ask questions, most of them sit silently as if there was nothing to ask. REALLY? There's nothing in that presentation that you'd like clarification on?  You don't feel the desire or need to question how things are REALLY going, how the money is being spent or whether or not a new program was effective?  That is shocking to me.  

Think like the public and be aware of what the public thinks. Then communicate with the public - all simple "Marketing 101" concepts for entities that would like to serve their "customers" well.  These are things we should all expect from the five directors of the Everett School Board but don't feel like we are getting.  I hope that in the next election of 2 school board members in 2013, that the public chooses people who feel a sense of obligation to the public and not to the Union, the superintendent or the other board members.  

September 11 School Board Meeting Report

Sat through the first school board meeting of the new school year last night.  At times, it becomes a personally victory to outlast every other non-district employee in the room.  When I finally left after 3 1/2 hours, it was just me and the education reporter from the Everett Herald left in the cheap seats.  I think she was about to leave, too.  We should have gotten a prize as we left.  

The meeting had two main purposes last night.  First, to present the district-wide results of the Washington State MSP (Measurement of Student Progress) test.  And, second, for the board to vote to accept the new three year teacher contract including a lengthy justification of the new "Early Release Fridays" to provide collaboration time for teachers.  

A whole lot of time was given to the newly accepted three year teacher contract last night.  The calendar is actually a good thing.  Instead of what seems like endless amounts of random early release days throughout the year, they have decided to put most of them on Fridays from October through May.  So, our kids will get out 75 minutes early (not totally a half day) every Friday.  Thank goodness it's FRIDAY.  The scuttlebutt was that it started out as Wednesday which was totally useless.  At least on Friday you can hit the weekend a little early if you're going somewhere.  

Some of our breaks were shortened a bit and there were fewer half days of other types.  The result is that we get out in the TEENS in June (17th) which has been almost unheard of for a lot of years.  Last year we were out 10 days later than that.  Most parents I'm talking to like the calendar.  

However, the point of early release Fridays seems to be lost on a lot of people right now.  I heard the word "Collaboration" no less than 200 times last night (I should have counted.  I wanted to start screaming whenever I heard it after a while).   I agree that teachers need to be on the same page for continuity.  However, I am not entirely convinced that weekly sessions for an entire school year are needed to accomplish this.   But, the district seems to think it's the most brilliant plan EVER.  Oddly, most of the districts around us are already doing this or started it this year.  School Districts love to keep up with each other!

I appreciated the question asked by Director Pam LeSesne.  She wanted to know how the district was going to prove to the School Board and the Public that collaboration time improved student scores.  Throughout the presentation, I heard two disturbing assumptions.  First, that collaboration time was every bit as important as instruction time, and, second, that it shouldn't matter WHO your child gets for a certain subject.  With collaboration, all teachers should produce the same result.  Really?  That is sort of offensive to teachers.  That kind of implies that you could train anyone to present material and produce the same result.  I have no problem with a GREAT teacher helping an average or even poor teacher to be a better teacher.  But, teachers are not the same.  Two can present the exact same material and one will inspire and excite the students and the other can put them to sleep.  Personalities are different as are students.  There will never be equality to that extent no matter how much time is spent "Collaborating".  

Anyway, the answer to Director LeSesne's question was basically, "ANY increase in student test scores will be assumed to be a result of these collaboration Fridays."  Well, that doesn't prove ANYTHING.  If scores go DOWN, will THAT be assumed to be a result of a loss of instruction time because of these collaboration Fridays?  I'm thinking that would be a "no".

I HOPE that teachers will use this time as it's intended.  Like everyone, I want to see greater success among our students.  I want to be more than "average".  This is a huge change in the calendar and somewhat of an inconvenience for parents and if we can't measure results, then we need to get rid of it next year when they re-evaluate.  But, my gut tells me they will want more time and Fridays will become true half-days.  

The other very disturbing part of the contract was the Union wanting the school board to issue a statement against Initiative 1240 - the Washington State Charter School Initiative.  We are one of only 9 states in the country without charter schools.  If they are as bad as the Union wants you to believe, then why do 41 other states have them?  The Union wants the assurance that if that law passes (will of the people) that the Everett School Board (supposed to be "the people") will NOT authorize any charter schools in our district.  If they do, the Union can demand the whole contract be re-negotiated with 30 days notice.  It's akin to extortion.  "Permit charter schools here and we might exercise our option to make some trouble for you."  Wow.... The board didn't issue a statement against Charter Schools but DID agree to that provision to re-call the contract.  However, my gut tells me the majority of the members don't support Initiative 1240.  But, if it passes, I expect the board to honor the will of the people and not the will of the Union. They represent US (in theory but not reality).  But, then, we like "average" here so we wouldn't want a charter school to make us look bad....  

My final thought about the meeting last night was the pettiness that continues to plague the school board.  During Board Comment time, Director Carol Andrews felt the need to bring up the fact that Director Olson was absent last night (she was sick) and pointed out the exact percentage of meetings she has missed. She then spit out, "I thought we were a FIVE member board."  Then, she must have realized how ridiculous she sounded (given the fact that I am relatively sure that when Director Olson called in sick that there was some internal celebrating going on in at least 3 members and the superintendent given the content of the meeting last night) and said, "Well, I know there is a lot of sickness going around this time of year."  It was so petty and disingenuous because for nearly 2 years, it's been a FOUR member board with one member who is always the beaten down (literally and figuratively) outsider.  Carol got her dream last night - a discussion on a three year teacher's contract with a lot of unanswered questions in it and the presentation of very average MSP scores and no "Contrarian" to ask too many questions and make it "messy".  I am sure she was happy about Director Olson's absence so to act like they have this warm and fuzzy relationship with the 5th member and they missed her presence was just "Theater".  

Fun times....