The Dictatorship of the School Board

The 2011-12 school budget was presented to the School Board on Tuesday Aug 30th 2011. There was very little discussion and the issues brought up on my previous article were predictably not addressed. The School Board showed their elation in the turn of teacher negotiations that exacted a wage freeze on the Bellevue teachers and still forced them back to school.

As the current rate of inflation tracked up to July this year stands at a 3.6%, teachers have in fact been handed a 3.6% pay cut. The real increase in prices outstrips inflation and thus the real pay cut is much worse. The negotiations have not been settled to the satisfaction of teachers.

The question and answer session was brief. The School Board president Chris Marks called on names of community members who had initially expressed a desire to raise questions. There were about 10 speakers. All but the last two or three speakers could not help but bend over backwards flattering the School Board for a job well done. It may not be a coincidence that these names were called first.

Among this first lot, spokespersons from the reactionary groups Stand (Stand For Children) and the League of Education Voters (LEV) were in display. A gentleman - whose name I do not recall - came up and acknowledged the treacherous work done by the PTSA with the guidance of Stand and LEV in its push/poll survey on teachers. Jess Hasken, an organizer for Stand followed with an appreciative note to the Bellevue Education Association (BEA) and the School Board for reaching a settlement on negotiations. The fact that this "negotiation" does not protect teachers, but is a further lurch by the union to the right was predictably not a concern for Miss. Hasken and this somewhat privileged layer who make their living out of the systematic destruction of the public school system.

Several other individuals came up to give testimony. They were all largely positive. The BEA president - Michele Miller - appeared to feign disrespect towards the Board by yawning as she left the microphone. There was not much else she could do when the union leadership worked from day one to block a strike and force the teachers to the school. The teachers' union and the district were in agreement to put the "children first", be damned the teachers.

By adopting the baseless and reactionary slogan of "children first", uttered by the most hypocritical of all people like the billionaires funding Stand and LEV, the teachers union shows where their true concerns are. The teachers union is responsible for disorienting and confusing the teachers and providing them false hope. The biggest lie they tell the teachers is that their struggle can be won without a protracted political struggle against the establishment on clear class lines.

Sometime after this, a teacher who also identified himself as a parent spoke up. [I believe his name was Todd, but I could be wrong] He was not a sycophant of the Board nor the Superintendent. He asked some pointed questions about the impropriety of Dr. Cudeiro who runs a private education consulting company while being employed as the Superintendent of the School District. He specifically asked the Board the reasons for their lack of transparency in addressing an issue of such vital importance to our children's education.

This is the point where the School Board - on impulse - decided to show its generally hidden face of Dictatorship. The Board president Chris Marks promptly condemned the teacher for asking such questions. She considered the questions rude and uncalled for and suggested that issues like conflicts of interest are not public concerns but things to be talked over in private! She suggested that this teacher come meet with her for an explanation. To his credit, the teacher re-clarified his position and demanded that these matters made public.

Chris Marks is possibly ignorant of general norms of Democracy. There are Washington state laws that are clear on what a conflict of interest is and the situation where it is not permitted for a state official like Dr. Cudeiro. I have remarked on this on a previous posting, bringing up the actual wording of the law (RCW) on the matter. Chris Marks's ignorance however does not excuse her - she is the President of the School Board.

Regardless of her level of education on such matters, the intended aim of her outburst is clear - that of silencing any opposition to the fragile position of the School Board who ardently defends all actions of the District.

Chris Marks' attempted intimidation was followed by a somewhat gentler admonishment from another new member of the Board - Christine Chew. Chew thanked the community who has unfailingly supported the school board and the district reminding the audience how all communication to the district and the board should be of a certain - presumably gentle and tactful - tone. According to Ms. Chew, this means that issues that upset the school board should preferably not be aired in public, and if it must, it has be couched in such language so that it is hard for normal people to understand.

The District has largely given up its pretense at Democratic norms. This year they no longer hold large public meetings. They arrange a small group of supporters to speak in their much smaller Board meetings. The small public meetings arranged by the district-led committees are also controlled by a core group of community members who are hostile to democracy and are quick to intimidate the audience who has genuine questions that runs against the privileged grain of this lot, as I have shown on other postings. Rank and file teachers are scared to criticize anything due to fear of punishment - this I sense through unsigned mail I get from teachers as well as the atmosphere of hostility that all predominant groups like PTSA, LEV, Stand have created towards our teachers.

After the speaker took his seat, a community member who identified herself as being in a profession related to legal matters spoke further on a District practice of providing third parties data on our children without explicit parental consent. She spoke about the loss of privacy this results and how such methods could be used by third parties in ways that could be damaging to the students.

None of these issues were answered by the School Board. Their singular aim was to adjourn the meeting and run to safer havens. The normal protocol for a Board meeting does not adjourn the meeting without asking the audience if there are further questions. But this Tuesday, such norms were abandoned. No further questions were taken.

As this process continues, even less people will attend these elitist meetings. The School Board enjoys their elitist Democracy and in ignorance of history assumes that they can continue without the support of a broad mass of people. And in this way, they provide for the deterioration of Democracy and a movement of the political establishment further to the right.

Today, we, the average working people, who care about a quality education for our children cannot depend on the School Board to conduct any meaningful reform of the school system. Concerned teachers, students and community members need to come together to create a plan for public education for the district of Bellevue. This plan must reject the notion of the district that "there is no money". There is enough money at the local, state and Fed levels but it is the considerations and interests that allocate resources for society that determine the quality of education and the general living condition of the masses of people.

And that is the reason that building a public school system for the twentieth century falls on our shoulders, we the working class who are many and are thus objectively united in our class interests. I ask all those interested to email me so that we can continue this work we started earlier.