Denny-Sealth vote tomorrow: Board agenda updated

The agenda for tomorrow night’s Seattle School Board meeting, including the vote on the Denny-Sealth combined-campus project, is now updated on the district website. In the public-comment section at the start of the meeting, 18 people are listed as signed up to speak about the Denny-Sealth proposal (you can see the entire list on the agenda posted online). Also added to the agenda since this morning is the “updated report” on the actual item on which board members will be voting, whether to “transfer” $10 million to the Denny-Sealth project in support of Option 2. Here’s a link to that; its list of the sources for the $10 million is: “$1.5 million from Debt Service Fund, $3.5 million from BEX III Technology, $5 million from BEX III Infrastructure.” Again, the meeting’s at 6 pm tomorrow, district HQ in Sodo; we’ll be there and plan to liveblog it with continuous updates here, start to finish (you can also watch live on cable channel 26).

9 Replies to "Denny-Sealth vote tomorrow: Board agenda updated"

  • Debbie February 26, 2008 (5:31 pm)

    Still trying to figure out how the agenda changed from the original vote of Option 1, 2 or 3 to only voting on Option 2. Looks like the district has employed the shell game once again.

  • westello February 26, 2008 (6:44 pm)

    FYI, from the agenda item on Denny/Sealth:

    The Building Excellence Program Phase III Construction Management Team, DKA, has contracted with Regina Glenn of Pacific Communications Consultants (PCC) to provide community outreach services, newsletters web site postings, meeting announcements and distribution and community meeting facilitation.
    PCC will provide services for community meetings and multi-media updates on the progress of the Denny/Sealth project.

    All this money for consultants – it is very difficult to believe the district when they cry poor.

  • WSB February 26, 2008 (6:48 pm)

    I saw that same language before the official district meeting at Sealth 2/4/08 — Regina Glenn was the person who “facilitated” the meeting, first I had seen of her in the process. That’s her in the photo before the PPT screengrab:

  • Delfino February 26, 2008 (6:50 pm)

    It would have been nice if they would have done this a year ago when they knew there was significant concern and opposition to the plan.

    A little late now. What are they going to do, ask us to weigh in on the color of paint? Actually, don’t hold your breath, Facilities knows the colors they want, and if your input doesn’t match their “studies” your input will likely be ignored.

  • chas redmond February 26, 2008 (8:26 pm)

    This will be a good test for what I hope doesn’t turn out to be one-term wonders on the school board. Depending on their vote, I’d suspect a whole bunch of us will be voting for yet another new board member in just under 4 years. I’ll be particularly watching Sundquist. If he reflects the community he’ll vote no. That’s a pretty simple acid test.

  • Charlie Mas February 26, 2008 (10:43 pm)

    The Community Engagement portion of the Board Action Report is supposed to be description of the community engagement that was done BEFORE the decision, not the public relations effort AFTER the decision.

  • Charlie Mas February 26, 2008 (11:08 pm)

    Maybe I’m not reading it right, but here is the BEX III budget as it will be presented to the Board tommorrow in the context of the vote to allocate money to the interim sites to fix them up a bit.

    According to this budget, the allocation for the Denny-Sealth project is $134 million plus another $3 million of the Program Contingency Allocation for a total of $137 million.

    But in the presentation to the community and to the Board, Facilities said that the budget for Denny-Sealth was $125 million. In case you’re thinking that the $134 million includes the extra $10 million for Option 2, it doesn’t, because further down on the same page this budget shows the full $26 million for infrastructure projects and the full $42 million for technology projects – amounts that would have been reduced if Option 2 were approved.

    So why does the staff say that the budget for Denny-Sealth is $125 million in one place and $134 million in another place? And if they really have allocated $134 million for the project before coming up with another $10 million for Option 2, then don’t they have the money for Option 3?

  • Delfino February 27, 2008 (6:38 am)


    I have had a heck of a time trying to decipher District information and figures and budgets. What do you make of this document?

    If I read this correctly, it seems the construction portion of the budget (the portion subject to “cost escalation” is much smaller than the figures escalation was based on for the cost estimates of Option3.)

    Its very hard to tell with all the transparency, but my take is that Option3 could look very different if the Board has the will to direct Facilities to do it.

  • westello February 27, 2008 (8:04 am)

    Facilities, for whatever reason, adds in the state matching fund (that’s how Hale’s budget went up) even though neither Denny/Sealth nor Hale have qualified yet for matching funds (I checked). That’s how the figures changed. But yes, it is more money and a bigger budget.

    By the way, in another area where Principal Boyd is interview, I asked where Irene Stewart was in all this as she originated the idea. She asked how I got that idea (from Director de Bell who told the BEX Oversight Committee this). She also said she’s a parent at Sealth and asked why, if I didn’t live in West Seattle, I was involved.

    Interesting, a former Board Director with a student at one of the involved schools and this is the first time I have seen her mention it. I didn’t see her at any of the public meetings or writing in here or being quoted in the West Seattle Herald.

    As to the issue of why someone who doesn’t live in West Seattle should care, I told her (a) because it’s a lesson every SPS parent should know about because if it can happen here, then every school should watch out for the staff coming in and forcing something on a school and (b) as voting taxpayers, we all have a right to ask where the money goes. (I also reminded her that I am a long-time activist for the entire district so it shouldn’t exactly be a surprise that I would care.)

Sorry, comment time is over.