Given the upcoming election for school board positions, I was wondering if it was a requirement to live in the director district you represent.
We have three positions open right now that will be on the November ballot, and based on the residence information we have - the current Board members who are on the ballot do reside in the correct Board member district. We do not check the address of those who file with the Auditor’s office; that office verifies the requirements.
If a Board member moves out of their director district after they have been elected and depending on when they move, they are either allowed to finish their term of office or the remaining board members select a replacement to complete that term. Then, that position would be open just as any at the regular cycle of the term. The Washington State School Directors Association (WSSDA) has all the legal references and requirements if you have additional questions.
Are there any such board members, currently living outside of the director district they represent, that have been allowed to continue serving on the board? If so, is such a decision made during a public board meeting or behind closed doors? What percentage of their term must be served while a resident of the director district they represent?
One of our current Board members, Bruce Williams moved still within the district, but outside of his “director” district. At that time, we checked with WASDA and based on the timing of his move and where it fell in his term, the law did not require him or the district to make any changes and he is allowed to complete his term. When his position opens in 2009, he would not be eligible to run for that specific “director” position based on his new residence; however, since he still lives within the district he could decide to run for the “director” district where he now resides if he wanted to when it became open. This required no district action other than to verify with WASDA at that time. It is something that was known by the Board and staff at that time as we processed that information. This rarely happens in school districts, thus you are welcome to communicate with WASDA to learn more.
I have contacted the County Auditor, as you recommended. It would appear as though Dr. Williams was re-elected and then promptly left his director district. When the majority of one's term is spent living outside of their director district, how does this serve the best interests of the public?
Dr. Williams was re-elected and later bought a new house; however, he stayed at his old residence while he was modernizing the new one. Thus, he did not leave “promptly” as you suggest; and when he moved it was clearly within the WSSDA parameters for him to continue on the board. Keep in mind the law requires all board members once elected to represent the whole district and at no point are they to vote or represent just their “director” districts in district matters. Thus, this law is in the best interests of the public because all board members once elected do represent all of the public in the school district. He has and continues to be a distinguished veteran board member who also has a medical practice in the district.
Such modernizations would trigger building permits.
So, Dr. Williams has more than one residence and is seeking public office from the more convenient address.
Painting and such does not require a building permit.
Dr. Williams was already in office and had not changed his residence; these are the rules for this type of change during any Board member’s term.
So when the District seeks a capital levy to modernize schools we shall expect the amount to be limited to the price of paint.
The auditor's response is attached. It seems responsibility has shifted back to the District.
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Bruce Williams was "modernizing"
Posted by ESD15.org at 5:28 PM
Labels: Bruce Williams, Operational issues, School Board
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Does his wife know or was he modernizing behind her back?
The beauty of a house is in the strength of its structure, its character, its history.
A younger house might seem more exciting because of the paint, carpet and drapes, but over time its luster diminishes and one might start looking for another house to modernize.
Maybe the new house had a lot of sweat equity.
Thank you for your contribution. My list of comments awaiting approval is at a record level.
It sounds like the District continues to play fast and loose with the rules. Maybe they'll have Sontaag bless the mess before it grows legs and starts running on its own.
A school board member illegally holding a seat? For what profitable end? I was once told in confidence that a Business Services staff member was directed by Marla Miller into recording an accrual in the wrong year; completely against all standard accounting practices. CPA’s lose their licenses over this behavior.
Sonntag, are you reading this? Do you really think we can afford another year to check their books? Given the questionable land dealings, perhaps an investigation into the personal finances of the board members is warranted too!
So Williams moved somewhere around 6/2007?
According to the Snohomish County recorded documents, he quit claimed his residence, 717 9th Ave S, Edmonds, WA in OCTOBER to his wife. Also, she refinanced the residence 2/2007
the document list her as LEGALLY SEPERATED. You mean Bruce (aka John Bruce) still lived with her after being legally seperated?
Here's Bruce's statutory warranty deed for his new residence at 23123 83rd Ave W filed APRIL 2007. Note that his mailing address was 8615 238th St SW #6302 then. So if he was getting his mail there, how can he claim to still be living at 717 9th Ave (per Nick's email? Notice it also says he's unmarried.
Gee, "Irresponsible Communicator", your investigative report stings a little. Thank you for uncovering this telling piece of data. Quite frankly, I had no idea where he lived - but then I was searching for homeowners.
When I pass out the Bloggie Awards in February, engraving "Check the County Records" is going to cost a pretty penny.
Aw shucks! And Nick says we don't have proof of anything and we're just telling lies.
I have to wait until February for a bloggie? No need to engrave it, just invite me to the party when the honest and forthright prevail.
Bruce was living in Park Place Apartments on Edmonds Way when he was shopping for a new house.
Is Nick misleading the public or did Bruce mislead Nick to retain his seat on the board?
Good question. Are the Park Place apartments in director district #4?
I am lost. Was Dr. Williams modernizing an apartment? Why would he rent an apartment if he was living in his old house while modernizing a new house?
Someone is lying.
Bruce Williams as with the other board members have no real integrity. They belong to a school board simply for the professional community connection, the perk on a resume, and the chance to dream that they are important - even if it means being the puppy dog to corrupt and dishonest administration.
If they had any integrity to perform their responsibilities as trustees of a public school system - or if they even gave a damn about children - changes would have been effected a long time ago.
The board members know what they like, and like what they know - seeking only a few feel goodies as reward for their complicity.
Can you link this information and the corresponding court information to his iss tags? What a treat it would be to Google his name and find this first and foremost!
A bit more time for modernizing now, eh?
Post a Comment