Seattle School Board member Peter Maier was only a footnote in the Seattle Public Schools’ $1.8 million contracting scandal this spring, which culminated in the firing of superintendent Maria Goodloe-Johnson amid a parade of front-page headlines. But it turns out that Maier, who is seeking reelection this fall, received a report in 2009 that warned of potential malfeasance in the small-business program. Had Maier acted on that information, critics say, he could have saved hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Instead, Maier ignored those red flags.

“Maier has utterly failed in his oversight responsibility,” says David Edelman, a teacher at Ingraham High School, located in Maier’s Northeast Seattle district.

As chair of the school board’s Operations Committee, Maier acknowledges that he read warnings in a document called the Sutor report, commissioned by the district, about irregularities with a small-works contracting program, originally a component of the regional small-business development program. It was run by former Seattle Public Schools employee Silas Potter. Nearly two years before Washington State Auditor’s Office investigators alleged that almost $2 million had been fraudulently awarded via the small business development program for projects that were never delivered, the report detailed glaring problems with assigning contracts, including hiring unqualified contractors and using improper documentation. The report also warned about a conflict of interest between certain programs, and it recommended that their administration and management be separated.

“The level of deficiencies found during our review… results in the conclusion that significant changes need to be made with respect to the administration and staff procedures,” it said.

“And then what did he do?” Edelman asks. “Nothing! He didn’t follow up with the superintendent, and he didn’t even contact the other board directors.”

Maier admits as much.

At a March 6 school board meeting, right before the board unanimously voted to fire superintendent Goodloe-Johnson for her role in the scandal, Maier said he had been alerted to the problems and didn’t tell the board.

“I read the report and was concerned,” Maier said. Former facilities director Fred Stephens handed him the report in January 2009, Maier said, after his first meeting as chair of the Operations Committee. At the time, approximately $1.2 million dollars had been lost. Between the time Maier received the report and when the district finally sought a criminal investigation, according to the state audit, the district had lost another $500,000.

“He is directly and personally, though not wholly, responsible for the Pottergate scandal,” Edelman continues.

Could Maier have saved the district money by taking action when he saw the report?

“I don’t think that’s possible,” Maier says. Even though the report had its own red flags he blames Stephens for “not telling me the whole truth.”

Two people challenging Maier in this year’s election, Sharon Peaslee and John Cummings, criticize Maier for failing to act. Meanwhile, the Seattle Education Association, the union representing teachers, and some of Maier’s colleagues on the board have expressed similar concerns.

“Deep down somewhere, he knows he did a shitty job,” says Cummings.

Maier has also been the subject of criticism for rubber-stamping the district’s administration instead of standing up for parents and teachers. For example, Maier irked the teachers union by voting for a contract with Teach for America, a program to bring fresh college graduates to work as teachers in schools, even though there’s no shortage of local teachers in Seattle. Little surprise then that the union decided against endorsing Maier this year (his challengers filed too late to get the union’s endorsement). Maier also supported the controversial shuttering of schools and ardently supported Goodloe-Johnson, even though schools, parents, and teachers voted no-confidence in her.

“I am a problem solver, not a table thumper,” Maier argues.

But Seattle Education Association vice president Jonathan Knapp says that while Maier likes to say he solves problems behind the scenes instead of discussing them publicly, “the Sutor report was something he could have acted on behind the scenes, but he didn’t.” recommended

This article has been updated since its original publication.

More in NEWS

Local (and not-so-local) news from your favorite writers.

Suite Deal

The longest hotel strike in Washington state history is over now that workers at the downtown Embassy Suites have a contract.

17 replies on “Red Flags”

  6. … ahhh let me see… Peter Maier

    voted for the pathetic “Discovering: HS math adoption … cost $1.2 million

    voted for the New Tech Network $800,000 contract that he had not read. Then voted for it again two months later despite the evidence that this was a big waste of funds….. yup it was a big waste of funds .. but as Peter said … Its about project based learning and that is good enough for my vote. Besides we need this to make the new student assignment plan work.

    So Peter why is Garfield over crowded? Is the New Student Assignment plan working???

    Peter why did you vote to close five schools? Only to reopen schools just a little later.

    Peter has voted to waste millions … Peter regularly disregards evidence to waste funds … that is Peter’s modus operendi.

  7. I believe that a thorough investigation would show that Steve Sundquist is likely Peter Maier’s equal in regard to making incompetent decisions.

    Steve Sundquist is heralding his leadership in the New Student Assignment Plan … WOW Steve have you noticed the overcrowded mess in Northern West Seattle elementary schools after you pushed for closing Cooper and giving the building to Pathfinder. ….

    Steve will likely now suggest the reopening of Fairmont Park …. Steve delivers maximum inconvenience at great cost…. What a guy.

  8. In over three and a half years on the Board, Peter Maier has yet to vote even once against a staff recommendation. While that doesn’t make him a rubber-stamp, it doesn’t make him any different from one.

    Think of it. Over three and half years. Hundreds of votes. He has never voted against a single thing that the superintendent put before him. Even Steve Sundquist has voted “no” a couple of times (literally twice) and Sherry Carr, Miss Go-along-to-get-along, has also voted against staff recommended motions twice. But Peter Maier never has. His record is perfect.

    Peter Maier apparently needs only one question answered before he votes: “What does the staff recommend?”

  9. Besides going to the Superintendent, Peter also did NOT tell his colleagues about the report. He could have and then they probably would have read it and one of them acted more decisively. (This is not to let them off the hook – they knew the report existed but either overlooked the notice about it or just didn’t bother to ask to see it.)

    Also both Martin-Morris and Sundquist knew about issues with this program in late 2008. They were both told about issues with the Small Works program including a company not being licensed and doing shoddy work AND not doing background checks on workers in school buildings where children were present.

    In June 2010, the Board received the state audit where this is first pointed out to them (the program had taken money from Capital for its funding and was not allowed to). I, along with other activists, warned the Board that something was wrong.

    They did not launch their investigation until December 2010. By then, Fred Stephens, head of Facilities and Potter’s boss, had left for the Dept of Commerce, and Potter had left town for Tampa, Fl.

  10. The Board – especially those running for re-election – likes to pretend and claim that they “acted promptly” to address problems in the RSBDP (Pottergate). But let’s remember the actual timeline:
    2008
    – Board members are told about problems in the program

    2009
    – Board members approve a budget that spends nearly a million dollars on the program
    – The Sutor Report describes serious problems in the program
    – Director Maier reads the Sutor Report but takes no action. Nor does he follow up to confirm that anyone else takes any action.
    – The rest of the Board is told about the Sutor Report but they treat it as a public relations problem instead of an internal problem

    2010
    – Board members approve a budget that spends nearly a million dollars on the program
    – The Board gets their first look at the State Audit in June and the report of problems in the program. They take no action.
    – The Board gets the the State Audit in July and the report of problems in the program. They take no action.
    – Six months later, in December, the Board requests an investigation of the program

    2011
    – The Board gets the results of the investigation and moves to fire the superintendent and the Chief Financial and Operating Officer.
    – The Board has plenty of cause for firing each of these officials, but chooses to fire them “without cause”. This decision transferred over $400,000 from the District to the fired officials.

    The popular perception is that Dr. Goodloe-Johnson and Mr. Kennedy were fired over the RSBDP program and the resulting scandal. That’s not true. That scandal was just the last brick in the wall. There was, over the previous three years, a long history of the superintendent mis-informing and misleading the Board with half-truths, evasions, and outright lies. Pottergate was just the last of the blown cover-ups. The Board’s un-written rule to “publicly praise and privately criticize” created the illusion that they were totally delighted with her performance. That was a lie they told the public.

  11. There can be no doubt that Peter Maier has utterly failed in his duties as a School Board Director.

    So why did he get endorsed by seven members of the Seattle City Council?

    Sally Bagshaw, Tim Burgess, Sally Clark, Richard Conlin, Jean Godden, Bruce Harrell, and Tom Rasmussen all endorsed Peter Maier (according to his web site).

    Their endorsement of his candidacy is evidence of their cluelessness. None of them can explain their decision.

  12. So Peter Maier read the Suter Report, was concerned, but didn’t bring it to the Board??? Sounds like a failing grade is what has been fairly earned! Who is running against him, again?

  16. It’s not enough for us to get rid of Peter Maier.

    It would be a good start, but we also need to get rid of Harium Martin-Morris, Steve Sundquist, and Sherry Carr. They all have to go.

    They totally failed to do the board job. They didn’t oversee the management of the District, they didn’t assure compliance with state law and board policy, and they didn’t represent the interests of the community. They failed to do these things, not because they lacked the ability, not because they lacked the tools, but because they consciously CHOSE not to do these things. They chose not to do their job because they have a different vision for the management of the District and their vision is one in which the Board is a facilitator for the superintendent instead of the superintendent’s boss.

    They have to go. All of them.

  17. Poor Peter, we’re picking on him … when the the collective board operates as hivemind to ignore their role as a governance body and reward failure again and again and again. The board needs a new queen bee and it should not be the Superintendent again. He’s a drone.

Comments are closed.