The road to choosing a Seattle School District superintendent has been anything but smooth. A process that included walkouts, protests, the resignation of all the final candidates, and the involvement of the mayor ended on October 7 with the decision to give the position to interim superintendent Raj Manhas.

After Superintendent Joseph Olchefske stepped down, the school board immediately began plans to elect a new superintendent. Their goal was to find the best person, not only for the position, but also for the community as a whole. To this end, they appointed an advisory committee made up of community leaders, parents of students in the district, and others. This committee worked together with the board to review candidates and choose the finalists.

The Seattle School Board began the search for a superintendent to replace Olchefske last spring, accepting applications from over 30 candidates hailing from school districts throughout the country. They then interviewed ten of these candidates, aided in their choices by a “screening profile” that the advisory committee developed a list of the characteristics and skills that a good candidate should have. From the ten interviewed by both the school board and the committee, four were chosen: Dr. Steven Adamowski, Dr. Libia Socorro Gil, Dr. Evelyn Williams Castro, and Dr. Joan P. Kowal. These finalists then faced interviews and public forums designed to further evaluate them, and the board set a deadline for the final choice.

As the date for announcing the finalists came approached, however, complications arose. Three members of the advisory committee – James Kelly, leader of the Urban League of Metropolitan Seattle, Delfino Munoz of the Multiracial Task Force on Education, and Christiane Ellsbree, a member of the Citizens for Effective Administration of Seattle Education (CEASE) – walked out on a meeting on September 25 with complaints that the school board had not given the committee enough time to thoroughly consider which candidate they wanted as superintendent, and they felt that their constituencies’ concerns were not being considered.

“If we cannot have an opportunity to have our (input) valued,” said Kelly before leaving the meeting, “I don’t want to be a part of this process.” Other committee members disapproved of the walkout, but some believed that the protests were valid. “[Kelly] felt at baseline [that] this is not a legitimate process,” said Eric Liu, another committee member. “That’s real.”

Some believe the rush in choosing a superintendent may have been motivated in part by a desire to fill the position before the upcoming November school board elections and the vote to renew the Education Programs and Operating Levy in February. The EP&O levy is a local property tax that is used to supplement school funding provided by the state. It makes up 22 – 25% of the total school district budget and is used for funding smaller classes, all day kindergarten, instructional support in the classroom, extracurricular activities, parts of ESL and Special Education programs, and transportation. It is renewed every three years.

“If the public doesn’t believe that the school district will spend the money wisely,” said Sally James, a Seattle School District parent, “and they vote down the renewal, it will be an immediate, acute financial crisis.” Another financial crisis could wreak havoc on the school district, already suffering from the $35 million deficit discovered last year. Establishing a superintendent now who can help pull the district together and solicit votes for the levy would greatly increase the chances for its renewal.

The selection process also encountered a few potholes involving the candidates. Two of the finalists, Dr. Joan Kowal and Dr. Libia Socorro Gil, withdrew their applications days before the final decision. The strength of Kowal’s application had been questioned because of the circumstances under which she left her last two jobs, in Palm Beach County, Florida and Hayward, California. Both school boards bought out her contract, paying $250,000 rather than have her continue in the position. She is currently under investigation by a California state agency for allegations of fraud and misappropriation of funds, and left her last school district $18 million in the red. Kowal called the accusations “a concerted campaign of undocumented rumors, allegations, and innuendo” but pulled out of the race anyway.

Dr. Gil confirmed on October 6 that she had withdrawn her application. She criticized the media coverage, saying that all the candidates had suffered from unprofessional press and public humiliation and harassment, and also pointed out that the rockiness of the selection process had created a poor environment for a new superintendent.

These withdrawals followed the committee’s vote that the board reject all four candidates and begin the process again. Mayor Greg Nickels voiced his opinion as well, siding with the committee and saying that the school board should look for a better match for the position. He also advised that they postpone the decision until after any new board members are elected so that the new members can have some say in who gets the job.

“I think that [the school board] was surprised that the committee wasn’t willing to endorse any of the candidates,” said committee member Jane Fellner.

The board, despite conflicting advice from the committee, announced that they would present their decision on October 7 as planned. One last twist came, however, when both of the remaining finalists, Dr. Steven Adamowski and Dr. Evelyn Castro, chose to withdraw their applications. The decision was made to appoint Raj Manhas, the acting superintendent, to the position. Disapproval clouded the announcement, however. “This search has deteriorated into nothing more than a prom queen contest,” said one board member, “and we scared away all of our finalists.”

Manhas, a native of India, studied at the University of Washington after coming to Seattle 30 years ago. He served as Director of Field Operations for Seattle Public Utilities before coming to Seattle Public Schools in 2001. An article on the Seattle School Board website credits him with being “instrumental to restoring fiscal integrity to the District … instilling a sense of hope and healing among District staff in the wake of a financial crisis.”

“Let’s not select on the basis of the last person standing,” another board member commented. Whether or not that is actually what happened is anybody’s guess.