Seattle school board recall effort shows parents are getting serious

The drumbeats around a possible School Board recall in Seattle have been growing louder for quite some time. But its main target, board President Liza Rankin, has not changed course.

On Friday, the parents behind this nascent effort filed their first notice of official action, a petition targeting Rankin for “numerous acts of misfeasance, malfeasance and violations of her oath of office.”

Their complaints, laid out chapter and verse on the Seattle Hall Pass podcast, exploded in the wake of Seattle Public Schools’ frustratingly opaque process for deciding which buildings to close for more efficient operations, and highlighted the fuzzy rationale for closing any buildings at all.

But the petition charges more problems than just school closures, outlining a pattern of holding families at arm’s length and refusing to respond in any meaningful way to their concerns.

Rankin might not argue this point. She has made no secret of her interpretation of the School Board’s role: less time spent responding to community emails, and more conceiving broad, districtwide policies.

Hundreds of voters in Seattle disagree. A poll of 613 likely voters conducted in late October found that a majority disapprove of the direction of Seattle Public Schools. Forty-one percent said they would vote to recall the school board.

“I wish I didn’t have to submit a recall petition to force President Rankin and the District to actually engage with the community, but it has come to this,” said Rebekah Binns, a parent at Graham Hill Elementary. “President Rankin can’t keep ignoring our families.”

Specifically, the recall petition signers charge that Rankin has overseen a rushed and wrongheaded process for closing schools; repeatedly failed to be transparent on decisions central to the district’s performance; and — crucially — failed to ensure that Seattle schools deliver on long-promised improvements to student outcomes.

These are not casual concerns. While gripes about public education and the people who steward it are perennial, a recall vote takes things to another level.

This editorial board had serious reservations about Rankin when she ran for reelection last year, endorsing her opponent instead. The edit board called out Rankin’s failures on fiscal stewardship because she voted for a teachers contract knowing it would plunge Seattle Public Schools into a severe budget deficit. But her seeming obliviousness to the concerns of constituents was equally troubling.

She may be listening harder now. But that’s a lesson learned too late.