Actually it's the best thing the Board could do for him--fire Floyd and take the heat and Williams gets to be upset and get popular sentiment behind him.

If the old board or the hired consultants from a few years ago had downsized this office you'd be saying things like 'tough decisions must be made' or 'we must focus resources on academics.'

Sounds to me like the board is setting the direction --- we must slim down the budget to get out of the red.

Waitaminute Steve,
I thought we needed to worry about putting money into rundown buildings like Cleveland High and taking care of teachers who complain when they're asked to educate kids.
Bob Archibald has been saying all along that tough decisions need to be made, but he doesn't agree with you on Cleveland, so he's the enemy and Bill Purdy is the voice of reason.

I remember Patterson's intellectual rigor when reviewing candidates in the last election "if Slay is for them, I'm against them". Your responses on all-things-Slay are pitifully predictable.
I don't know if you've ever served on a governing board, Steve, but you only smack around your Executive Director (or Superintendent) this way if you're trying to force them out. And Downs and Jones specifically promised that this was not their agenda. They obviously lied.

Paul:

You are absolutely correct in that Board Member Archibald talks a lot about fiscal responsibility, but when it comes to voting, time and again he votes against measures that place restraints on the budget or measures aimed at reviewing the budget. At last night's Board meeting, Member Archibald said it didn't matter if the budget was $3.5 million in the positive or $4 million in the negative. Finally, remember he is one of an ever smaller number that was on the Board when the most outrageous spending occured--when we went through $100 million dollars to end up $50 million in the red.

Travis, you are just wrong on the facts. The $100 million in spending occurred during the school year that ended in May 2003. That is when Bob Archibald went onto the Board. The only current board member who was on the board for that breathless spending was Bill Purdy. He was the President!!!Archibald is a fiscal conservative.
Whether you approve of Floyd Irons or not do not pretend that this was a fiscal decision. This was an effort to a) get rid of Floyd; b) smack Demetrius Johnson and c) embarass Creg Williams.

It's about a lot of things but it's not about money.

Hey guys, the superintendent will defend his dining/gambling buddy and some think another kind of buddy because of Iron's reputation known to many as well as the superintendent's. It was good when superintendents were fully certified to be superintendents and had families to go home to after work (Oh, and weren't above driving themselves to and fom work or anywhere else.).

When the armed school district security officer drove them to Harrah's and had to wait on the clock until they were through eating and gambling, where did both men end up that night? That's a question being asked by employees who keep their noses down and peek at the goings on around them at the same time.

At $90,000 a year, there has been no accountability of Irons absences or goings on. This was a smart, move on the part of the board. What would the superintendent do about his boyfriend? Conflict of interest?

"this looks like a Board that's disruptive to the superintendent's work rather than supportive."

Could we have more analysis than a hyperlinked, inflammatory sentence? Jeez!

What does Kevin mean by "boyfriend"?

This guy is a successful b-ball coach, nothing more. Why all the fuss? He was going to quit next year anyway.

This whole thing is bizarre and uninteresting.

I just love it, everyone expecting the board to bow and kiss Williams' feet and saying, "Oh please don't leave us, you are our only hope!" Give me a break. This first-time superintendent is getting on the job training on our dime.

What could he have done differently? Oh, say submit a balanced budget a month ago! Williams works for the board, not the other way around. If they say give us a balanced budget that is what he should do. And because of the insistance of the new board Williams did just that.

If anything is predictable in all this is the reactions of the mayor and others. This is simply an attempt to deminish any ability of the new board to succeed. Williams was probably instructed from higher up to not submit a balanced budget just to push the new board into a conflicting position with the super.

As for Archibald disagreeing with me on Cleveland I don't see how that is possible given that I have not publically stated the school system should keep Cleveland active. It is very dangerous to start making such assumptions. The closest I've gotten is this from May, "I can accept that Cleveland may not stay open as a school but it seems like the action is being made hastily (like so many decisions). I can't help but wonder if we are not getting the full story."

Steve,
It seems this board is bent on proving to Williams that he is their lapdog. When Purdy and his bunch get off their power trip maybe we can get this district back on track and try to educate some children.
And to all the people that keep referencing the alleged casino trip: Have any of you had this verified through a credible source, or are we all still taking the word of a blogger who got the information from a possibly disgruntled former district employee?

Steve,
It seems this board is bent on proving to Williams that he is their lapdog. When Purdy and his bunch get off their power trip maybe we can get this district back on track and try to educate some children.
And to all the people that keep referencing the alleged casino trip: Have any of you had this verified through a credible source, or are we all still taking the word of a blogger who got the information from a possibly disgruntled former district employee?

Paul, the information relating to the casino trip was first sent out by the board president who had received tons of calls and complaints. It was sent to various persons and the media. The former employee (who by the way is not disgruntled but a concerned person and citizen like many others) was asked to send it out because that former employee is known for honesty.

Now others are also talking about priest-altar boy relationships with basketball team members and other improprieties. One principal said he should have been fired years ago. Just wait. More scandal will come out, when some parents and Vashon employees get up the courage to tell what's been going on.

Besides, what's important, sports or education? The Grand Jury should be called into the investigation.

====If the old board or the hired consultants from a few years ago had downsized this office you'd be saying things like 'tough decisions must be made' or 'we must focus resources on academics.'

===Sounds to me like the board is setting the direction --- we must slim down the budget to get out of the red.

Are you high? How does reducing two positions deal with a structural deficit when the stated goal of Downs and Jones was to add people back to the payroll? Are you in touch with reality? Seriously, do you have any idea of what the budget looks like? Because the above statement is pure silliness.

Floyd should have been gone years ago--the only reason he was given that spot was because no one wanted to take on people like Lacy Clay who insisted he was important to the District despite strong evidence of fiscal impropriety. So they booted him from the school so the only people he could screw up were his players.

===I just love it, everyone expecting the board to bow and kiss Williams' feet and saying, "Oh please don't leave us, you are our only hope!" Give me a break. This first-time superintendent is getting on the job training on our dime.

LOL--yeah. An apprenticeship under Paul Vallas is nothing. You are right Steve. Brilliant. He introduced high school curriculum changes in Philly and in Chicago, but he doesn't know what he is doing.

BTW, anyone want to comment on what we do about curriculum now? I mean, this is about the students and not the seven people on a board where everyone thinks they are managers and not board members. Back to the same crap that happened under Hammonds were the discussion is on the adults and not the kids. Congratulations Steve, you get what you want. A dysfunctional school district focused on the needs of adults.

I'm sure Purdy and gang will bring in someone just like last time and we can go back to having a Hammonds type clown who will worry more about keeping his job than educating students.

If we are really lucky maybe they can bring Chester Edmunds out of retirement. Oh, the old times.

===If anything is predictable in all this is the reactions of the mayor and others. This is simply an attempt to deminish any ability of the new board to succeed. Williams was probably instructed from higher up to not submit a balanced budget just to push the new board into a conflicting position with the super.

Do you even understand the basic conflict was about restructuring the District to meet the needs of students and not that of local 420? Mary Armstong wanted him gone, she got Downs and Jones on the Board and they jumped when she asked.

If you want to deal with the structural deficit in the system you have to change staffing patterns and that was a threat to 420. It's likely that the Board Majority will have to push for a tax increase soon--especially if they decide they are going to rehire a bunch of people. Given the inability of this Board to offer up credible long term plans for the District, one would have to be insane to vote for such a tax.

Make no mistake about it, this Board is about protecting employees over children. Williams got in the way of that. Now we'll have to wait for the District to implode before any serious reform can begin again.

I'll note that Floyd's spending and misuse of funds was under Purdy's term as Board President. That there were inadequate fiscal controls at that time and yet somehow Purdy is being given some sort of courage for firing Floyd is a ahistorical at best and at worst---just flat out denial.

The state can only take over the district if it stays unaccredited for two years -- it is currently provisionally accredited -- or if it fails to provide a full year of school. I wonder what the over under is on this turmoil and a new superintendent coming in without a plan keeping the district from starting school this fall and helping it meet that second takeover criteria.