Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Thursday Morning Sports Report | Christmas Comes Early »

Thursday, December 21, 2006

Norm Rice Is Too Nice

posted by on December 21 at 11:45 AM

I just got back from KING 5—taping a year-in-review segment for Up Front with Robert Mak. It airs on Dec 31. Lively panel—got to spar with radio jock Dori Monson and political consultant Cathy Allen among others. So, tune in next week.

But I will share the 2007 prediction I made: Former Mayor Norm Rice gets the superintendent of public schools job and flops.

Here’s why: Seattle parents have too much micromanagement power and, like spoiled children, need to be told NO! Rice is the archetypical Seattleite, and so, is incapable of playing that role. He wants everybody to be happy. He wants consensus. For this reason, he will come in as a savoir, but fail fail fail as superintendent.

RSS icon Comments

1

I completely agree. I've met Norm Rice on a number of occasions since he gave up being mayor, and I like him a lot. I think he was a better mayor than anyone we've had since. You're right; he is a nice guy. Very amiable and friendly. Way too nice for the Superintendent job. Much as I like him, I would advise him to avoid getting stuck with this job at any cost.

On the other hand, I can't really think of anyone who I think WOULD be good for Superintendent. Talk about a thankless job! Who'd want it? Ugh.

Posted by SDA in SEA | December 21, 2006 11:56 AM
2

Rice was a good mayor because he mastered the art of appearing to be nice while forcing big projects down the city's throat. He also had a thick skin. I can't predict how he would do as superintendant, but I don't think that he'd fail as a result of any lack of forcefulness.

Posted by RiceLover | December 21, 2006 12:08 PM
3
For this reason, he will come in as a savoir, but fail fail fail as superintendent.

He has what's known as savoir fail.

Posted by rodrigo | December 21, 2006 12:09 PM
4

"Seattle parents have too much micro-management power "

I think it's the opposite, Josh. Seattle has one of the lowest percentages of schoolage kids of any city in the country AND one of the highest percentages of private school attendance in the country. Both are consequences of the fact that the school district is insufficiently responsive to parents, and many parents have simply opted out of Seattle public schools.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky | December 21, 2006 12:11 PM
5

So that has nothing to do with the wealth of parents who choose to raise their kids in the city?

Posted by keshmeshi | December 21, 2006 12:16 PM
6

Right Stefan. And they want more power. And that's why everything is at a stand still. They need to get over themselves and let the schools make some decicions, rather than pouting and running off to private schools.

The fact that they have the private school option speaks to the larger problem. Our city is too much rich people. Rich people have too much sense of entitlement and so demand to get their way with the public schools. Parents need to back off and let the schools function.

Posted by Josh Feit | December 21, 2006 12:18 PM
7

Keshmeshi - no, it doesn't. Witness well-to-do suburbs like Mercer Island or Bellevue that enjoy high public school use. Wealthy does not equal private schools, so long as the public schools are doing the job.

Posted by JTR | December 21, 2006 12:20 PM
8

Josh, you might want to reword your comment #6, because as it reads now, it doesn't make any sense. Private schoolparents are preventing SPS from making decisions?

Posted by JTR | December 21, 2006 12:42 PM
9

"Here’s why: Seattle parents have too much micromanagement power and, like spoiled children, need to be told NO!"

Josh, just get the hell out of here. Just leave town. You are so not credible, so not qualified to speak on this subject. I am powerless to respond further in the face of such appalling ignorance.

Posted by ivan | December 21, 2006 1:08 PM
10

Josh - you are full of yourself.

Norm Rice is finely tempered steel. No, it he takes it, he will not fail.

Trust me, all the smile and charm is just one side of a very smart and solid guy - I used to work at city Hall.

Steel, finely tempered. Perfect for the task it he takes it - and watch him go into action.

Josh, you have never met a political leader any better than Norm. So I can undestand that you are used to the second string.

This is not Licata with a darker skin.

Class, sass, and steel and smarts. Go Norm.

Posted by sturgis | December 21, 2006 1:24 PM
11

I would love for the stranger to put someone (who doesn't already have their mind made up) on the seattleschools issue doing a big, well researched feature and then following it up with solid reporting on the issue.

This seems to be the big city problem after transportation and housing and it is currently not being addressed well in the stranger. What's happening in other cities, what are some of the proposed solutions, what is the problem from the perspective of a variety of viewpoints. How do people who study public schools and school reform assess the situation?

I will also echo that the wealth of the parents is not the problem. I work in a district that is fairly wealthy and few parents send their kids to private schools and the private schools are losing market share to public schools - though I do think we need to bring middle and working class families back into the city.

Posted by need school expert | December 21, 2006 1:25 PM
12

Norm Rice - that would be the guy who misused HUD money to build a garage for the Nordstrom's, no? The same guy who was instrumental in the building of two stadiums Seattle voters wanted no part of across the street from each other? The same pol who has never met a corporate welfare scheme he wouldn't sign off on?

Hint - appearing to be nice is a far cry from actually being nice.

The School Board was 100% correct in telling him to go through the process like everyone else.

Posted by Mr. X | December 21, 2006 2:07 PM
13

Most of the problems come down to selfishness. Everyone recognizes that hard decisions have to be made, but everyone wants someone else to bear the burden. Look at the debate over school closings. It basically went like this:

Closing schools? Fine. Wait, they want to close MY school? Off with their heads!

Posted by Orv | December 21, 2006 2:30 PM
14

The point being missed here is the ineffectiveness of the school board. I've met some of the school board members (particularly Brita Brita Brita) and I gotta say I haven't been impressed.

In the old days, school boards made broad policy, superintendents implemented it and parents had input both at public meetings, and at the voter box.

My boyfriend and I will likely never have any kids to send to a school, but we remain very committed to public schools because it benefits us all when their graduates go on to be successful citizens. Somehow, that's gotten lost in this mix and that's what need to be fixed.

As for Norm Rice, being a mayor does not make for a great superintendent. Roy Romer (ex governor of Colorado) has had his hands full running the LA school district. I don't think being a politico should give you a free ride into being the head of a school district.

Posted by Dave Coffman | December 21, 2006 2:45 PM
15

Re #14: The school board has no spine, it's true. When people started to protest the school closings, the board turned on the Superindentant instead of supporting him. The next person to take the job has to be thinking, "well, if I stick my neck out the board is just going to throw me under the bus the moment there's any opposition." This is a formula for inaction.

Posted by Orv | December 21, 2006 2:50 PM
16

Josh: "They need to get over themselves and let the schools make some decicions, rather than pouting and running off to private schools."

What do you propose to do about that? Prohibit parents from choosing schools for their own children? Build a Berlin-style wall around Seattle to ensure that families can't skip town and enroll their kids in a different school district?

Seriously, all of the childless advocates for "universal public education" can piss and whine and hector and blame the parents all they want, but unless the schools provide the parents with a service that parents expect, the system isn't going to work very well.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky | December 21, 2006 3:05 PM
17

the private school abundance was a predominantly white parent response to busing in the 70s and 80s, and continued with its own momentum after.

what's with the stranger's authoritarian kick, btw? it's getting worse and worse.

Posted by wf | December 21, 2006 3:22 PM
18

I agree with Josh. Norm might be alright for the job, but SSD needs to ditch board control and move to a strong superintendent appointed by the Mayor.

It's working well in NYC: the Bloomberg/Klein administration has cut a lot of administrative deadwood and are doing their best to turn around a historically byzantine and dysfunctional system.


The problem is, Bloomberg appointed someone in his own image (dynamic administrator), and I'm sure Nickels would too (spineless flim-flam man).

Posted by Some Jerk | December 21, 2006 3:32 PM
19

@12 -- Right on, Mr. X. Rice was just another sell-out mayor as far as I'm concerned. Nice or no nice.

Posted by I miss Charles Royer | December 21, 2006 3:56 PM
20

My girlfriend teaches middleschool, and I can relay that parents - especially this generation - do often act like spoiled children (tangant: to all you hysterical parents out there - keep in mind, you're kids LIE to you about what happens at school. Often, probably always. Keep that in mind next time you want to yell at the school for failing your child. Ok, back on track...). Although, I'm more familiar with parents' battles with teachers and priciples than with their conflics with the superintendent, who often battle the very same. Superintendant is a tough job, and is usually only publicized during school closures for which teachers fight for their jobs the same as parents fight for the kid's schools.

Based on what I remember about his time as mayor however, I wouldn't want him in charge of schools, unless you're primary concern for the district is the lack of covered parking.

Posted by Dougsf | December 21, 2006 4:00 PM
21

A diplomatic superintendent who can win the trust of parents in both "north" and "south" Seattle may be able to get something done here. Norm seems like that guy.

Posted by Sean | December 21, 2006 4:19 PM
22


I'm cool with Norm. He is a competent, solid leader with some stature and cred. He might seem nicey-nice but that's because he was good at his job. People liked working with him and had confidence in him. There's nothing wrong with being a little charming.

I know this is unpopular, but I agreed with him on the Pacific Place garage and love the fact that downtown has flourished because if his decisions. We wouldn't be talking about all the downtown "24/7" stuff if Norm didn't have the vision he did to make downtown a fun place for people to go at night. Downtown used to shut down at 6PM and now people, *mostly young people*, are still out and about at 9 or 10PM. It's cool.

Anyway, I think he'd make a good superintendent.

Posted by Okay Norm | December 22, 2006 10:19 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).