Stanford's reform is a sham \doc\web\98\06\stanford.txt From: David Blomstrom GeoNews Thursday, May 21, 1998 A New Ally? Wow, I talked to the second teacher/parent in as many nights who is really knowledgeable about Seattle Schools bureaucracy, thinks Seattle Schools is a corrupt organization, isn't afraid to talk about it, and wants to fight it. S/he is something of a community activist and will probably be added to my e-mail list once they acquire e-mail service. S/he describes John Stanford as an urban myth turned urban martyr. S/he's not as combative as I am, preferring not to attack John Stanford, the school board, etc. outright. But this individual made it clear that Seattle Schools is an aging dinosaur awaiting an errant meteor in the form of a community revolt. SPICE Scandal With most of Seattle in sympathy mode pending John Stanford's resignation, retirement, or book-signing leave, I wondered if the Seattle Weekly would again offend his Majesty before next school year. The answer is on the front page of today's issue: "How to steal from the School District." James Bush's article ("Cover-ups: SPICEgate," page 9) reveals the extraordinary lengths schools officials went to t o delay acknowledging the scandal. I didn't realize the incident went back more than a year; veteran attorney Mike Hoge and his sidekick, Ava Greene Davenport, are mentioned. The district's delayed response may have even given SPICE program secretary Laura Gauntlett protection from some charges due to the statute of limitations! As you may recall, Gauntlett (who embezzled more than $200,000) blew the whistle on her boss, Kenneth Camper. He was found to have spent tax dollars in some questionable ways. He got a new position (with a slight pay raise) out of the bargain. I was told about an even wilder allegation involving Camper, and was promised a copy of a police report, but I never received it so can't comment further. Bush reveals that a private detective the district hired to complete its examination embarrassed them with evidence "that the district was trying to cover up the problems at SPICE." They sure did a fine job of keeping it quiet until after the levy passed. Get a copy of the Weekly, clip this article for future reference, and write a letter to the editor. (By the way, there's also an article about Paul Schell's recent junket to Holland.) School Board James Bush struck a second blow for accountability (again without mentioning John Stanford) by noting, "Another odd precedent from our friends on the Seattle Times editorial board: endorsing potential Seattle School Board APPOINTEES." (Bush italicized "appointees," but that function works slowly on my e-mail program.) "Why didn't I notice that?" I thought. The appointee the Times team was pushing is Mary Jean Ryan, director of the city's Office of Economic Development who is linked to the Nordstrom's garage scandal. The obvious choice for Seattle School Board. Surprisingly, she didn't win. While sitting in the lunchrrom at work today, I heard an exclamation of joy as someone read that the post had been awarded to someone else. I forgot her name, but she's a parent who has at least one admirer. Seattle Weekly's "Media Watch" Some time ago, I was pleasantly surprised to discover the column "News Watch Dogs" in the Eastside Weekly. The column was a vehicle for John Hamer and Mariana Parks, who kept tabs on media that don't do their job. "Fantastic!" I thought. "This duo will certainly comment in abundance on the garbage the Seattle Times and P-I pass off as education news!" When the Eastside stopped publication, "News Watch Dogs" found a new home in the Seattle Weekly. I continued reading it for a while, but never saw a word about Times/P-I education news follies. Eventually, I tired of the focus on esoterica that tap dance around the most amazing non-news stories this side of the Missouri (River). Do any GeoNews subscribers read "News Watch Dogs"? Have I missed some spectacular commentaries on the Frank Blethen (Seattle Times' owner)/John Stanford media team? Any comments? Asian Weekly Today's issue of Northwest Asian Weekly includes an article by editor Melissa London entitled "Blaming school district, parents protest CAMPI funding cuts." It's not really provocative, especially compared to the article that appeared in The Stranger not long ago. Should We Pity Stanford? I've debated this (mostly with myself) via e-mail for some time now. As most of you know, I simply find Stanford too contemptible to deserve my sympathy, though I certainly don't fault others for offering him succor. Last night I talked to a teacher who is really disgusted with Stanford. "But what can we do?" she asked, noting that he's become a Seattle legend and is being touted by national media. For me, that's a good argument for cutting the legend off at the knees. So teachers, parents, and community leaders in some urban school district back East read about John Stanford's miracle 2.5-year education reform blitzkrieg and decide to model their district after Seattle's. The results? A waste of millions of tax dollars, the delay of genuine reform, untold grief for teachers, parents, and, ultimately, students. Sorry, but I think I'll pass on sitting this macabre passion play out. I had hoped that Stanfor'd illness might make him a bit more reflective, maybe imbue him with a little humitly. But his comments at Sealth High School shot that notion to hell. Here's another revelation I just heard: A frustrated Sealth teacher or parent said (an approximate quote), "You know this is driving us crazy; we're tearing our hair out." John Stanford: "While you guys were pulling your hair out, I was in the hospital losing my hair." Typically Stanfordish sleaze. As an aside, my informant said - if I understood correctly - that Stanford then tried to shift the pressure to his sidekick, Olchefske, who looked surprised. It was also noted that Stanford was visible ailing, merely walking across the room requiring significant effort. So why doesn't Stanford do Seattle students and his family all a favor and leave? P.S. Check out "The Lost Letters Scene of the Seattle Times," featuring some of the letters to John Stanford that weren't printed, in today's issue of The Stranger. It's not as in-your-face as I had expected, but is refreshingly irreverent.