Before he was elected mayor, Mike McGinn made something of a threat to Seattle Public Schools. If the district remained troubled—as it had during a cascade of budget shortfalls that resulted in shuttering several schools—he would commandeer the district. McGinn wrote on his campaign website in early 2009 that “if, after two years, there has been no improvement, I will move to have the mayor’s office take direct responsibility…”
Well, it’s been almost two years. And Seattle Public Schools, still beleaguered with financial shortfalls, has spun further into financial disgrace. A state audit found on February 23 that the district accidentally allowed a $1.8 million fraud in the small-business program.
About a week later, one day before the school board voted unanimously to fire superintendent Maria Goodloe-Johnson, Mayor McGinn appeared to follow up on his campaign pledge. He told Seattlepi.com that he was “prepared to be a ‘partner’ to the district” and “provide management and fiscal support” in the coming months.
But his overture had problems.
First, Washington State law doesn’t allow cities to take over school districts, which are independent local governments. The state constitution is clear on who can seize control of our public schools (the state legislature, in cases when laws are broken), and mayors don’t make the cut. For the City of Seattle to “take direct responsibility for the school district,” as the mayor first offered, McGinn would have to change the state constitution.
A partnership may be more realistic. But missing from McGinn’s offer were details of what a city–school district partnership would look like. The city already assists the district with athletic programs and the Families and Education Levy. Was his offer to “provide management and fiscal support” referring to the financial management? McGinn’s office didn’t respond to repeated requests for a comment.
Seattle Public Schools spokeswoman Teresa Wippel says the district’s newly appointed interim superintendent, Dr. Susan Enfield, couldn’t comment because there’s “nothing on the table yet.”
And the school board, while open to ideas, draws a line in the sand at letting the mayor manage school finances.
“It’s not as if we will turn over our books to the city,” says school board vice president Michael DeBell. “We have our own system and will protect the privacy of our employees.” DeBell has met with the mayor several times to talk about the subject generally, he says, recounting, “My expectation is not that the city will do our financial managing, but will give advice.”
Board director Kay Smith-Blum, meanwhile, says that she can’t imagine a scenario in which the school district wouldn’t have its own finance department. The school district has an annual budget of $556 million and 47,000 students, while the city operates on $3.9 billion, including an $888 million general fund budget.
“The city has its own fiscal controls and we have ours,” says Smith-Blum.
A day after a version of this story appeared on The Stranger‘s blog, McGinn wrote a stern op-ed in the Seattle Times once again offering to “partner” with the district “only if the district is serious about change.” But he remained vague, suggesting the city could provide “staff, management, and fiscal expertise.”
What if the board doesn’t like the mayor’s ideas? Well, then the board could always vote them down, DeBell said. However, DeBell says the school board may borrow from the city’s ethics policy. And board president Steve Sundquist also says he welcomes advice from city personnel. That said, Sundquist notes, the two government entities “need to stay separate.”
But is the school district—which appears to need a little help—making a mistake by not wanting to hand over its finances to the city? Not necessarily. New York mayor Michael Bloomberg, a finance and media mogul, tried taking over schools in his city. Four years later, he’s under fire from some people for failing to turn around the school system.
McGinn won as an environmental guy, lacking Bloomberg’s business background, so his chances for shaping up the schools seem even more far-fetched. And besides, McGinn has got plenty of other fires—his own city budget shortfall, a police force embroiled in allegations of misconduct, and a fight over the deep-bore tunnel—to keep him busy. The mayor and the district don’t need to compound each other’s problems. 
We could always form our own State and stop subsidizing the rest of the current Washington.
Mayor Richard M. Daley got the Illinois state government to change the law here to let the city take over the schools. And it’s worked out just great–one more thing for the city to fuck up.
@2, hilarious!
Reading the Mayor’s op-ed in the Seattle Times a couple of days ago, it sounded more like he was offering to loan them some bodies with expertise (finance, HR, etc) for a few weeks or months. It didn’t sound at all like he wanted to take over the district or the district’s finances.
James Yamasaki consistently rules.
@5 don’t you mean Jaegermeister?
During the campaign, McGinn showed he clearly had no idea what the mayor and the city do, and don’t do. Neither did his opponent. And people still wonder why I moved to Bellingham…
More proof that the mayor really doesnt know what he’s doing. He should go back to waging war on people who drive cars, or flinging insults at Olympia.
What’s interesting is that Riya seems to be right under the Constitution, Section 28, item 15.
However, I know several years back, Ed Murray and Greg Nickels had spoken out for mayoral control of the schools. I wonder how they thought they could do it.
The Board discussed accepting help this morning at a committee meeting and both Dr. Enfield, the interim superintendent, and the Board members present seemed grateful and willing to accept City help but had not yet determined what form that help might take.
Mayor McGinn takes the phrase “amateur hour” to a whole new level. This has been and continues to be a complete joke and embarrassment to the city of Seattle.