Wow, it's funny how your observations seem to be the nearly opposite those of Melissa Westbrook of the Seattle Schools Community blog, Brian Rosenthal of the Times, and actual video recordings provided by Traci Record at the West Seattle blog.

"Our interview began with the loquacious Mr. Enoch on the defensive, clarifying the facts behind allegations that he left the San Juan Island school district in financial disarray "

Video show Mr Enoch answering the question regarding the May 2004 SAO audit (released after he left) when it was asked. Rather than sound defensive, he sounded to me as someone who can, with confidence, rebut scuttlebutt slime like that published by ST and Crosscut. What he described sounds very similar to what I've heard at SPS audit and finance committee meetings for some time now; mediocre, lackadaisical and/or unqualified money managers unable to answer financial questions directly. Hopefully in our case that is now changing.

Rosenthal states Husk was light on specifics (but in my mind heavy with the jargon). Entry plan this and skill set that and parent outreach strategy whatever. Funny, because her hometown newspaper has reported for sometime now that she does no better than Goodloe Johnson on that last point.

I'm not sure many would agree that Husk's lay off of over 400 FTEs, and push for further concessions are "pro-teacher". Or did you mistake her edu-babble as that? Now, I would take Enoch's move to re-open contract negotiations to GIVE BACK concessions to teachers who took furloughs and deferred raises, and his investment in keeping small class sizes, as pro-teacher and pro-student.

Anyway, it's always funny to look to see Crosscut's peculiar take on things.

Enoch's money manager Terry Coulter was canned shortly after the audit results were released. Thought I'd share this comment by an actual teacher who recognizes someone who is pro-teacher better than you or me.

"I was a teacher in the San Juan Island school District during Mr. Enoch’s tenure as first a high school principal and later the district superintendent. I taught for 29 years in the SJED and was a high school science teacher (physics, chemistry, AP Physics, Physics, and geology) and also the Education Association president and contract negotiator. During that time I served under 13 principals and 7 superintendents. In both categories, Mr. Enoch was the best.

As a principal, he always backed his staff, never chewed them out in front of parents or students. If he didn’t agree with what you did, you were told in private and if it was important, you were told to change your ways. I found him fair and professional. You could disagree and it was never personal. As the union rep who usually went into the administrators office with a complaint to discuss I appreciated his attitude. Many other administrators seemed to prefer the “shoot the messenger” approach.

After only a year as principal, Mr. Enoch applied for the superintendent position when it became open. He was hired and this was his first time at the helm of a district. The business manager was Terry Coulter who curried a reputation as an innovative and forward-looking manager and for some years, he was able to deliver on his promises. I dealt with Mr. Coulter in negotiations and have never worked with a more opaque or confusing individual on finances. Ask for an explanation on any funding issue and 30 minutes later, I would leave his office with me head spinning. Understand that state financing is Byzantine at best and add an explanation not meant to clarify and you can see what we were up against.

Mr. Enoch’s last year in the district, the board decided to purchase land and build an office against Mr. Enoch’s advice. That spring, Mr. Enoch was recruited by an Eastern WA school district and he accepted the job. The next year, enrollment dropped and because of Mr. Coulter’s shell game, there were inadequate reserves. Many schools are tripped by this as they all want to satisfy needs and no one ever can predict the next year accurately enough when budgets are thin. Mr. Enoch didn’t see this coming. Maybe an experienced superintendent with years dealing with Washington state’s complex funding might have seen this but given Mr. Coulters unwillingness or in ability to offer clear explanations, I doubt it.

In closing, I would like to say that I found Steve Enoch to be a straight shooter who not only backed his teachers but who also asked that they improve. He was willing to give them both tools and support to do this. It was not just empty rhetoric. He will not be politically correct, he will not suffer fools and charlatans gently. Mr. Enoch will listen to all sides but he will let you know what he thinks. He will be fair. He will also ask that improvements be made and not accept “good enough” as an outcome. Looking at the past few years history in Seattle, I think that he is just what the district " Greg Hertel

What a funny piece.
The journalists certainly did NOT agree that Husk is "just right".
The business community seems to like her from what I've heard.
Those who disliked Goodloe-Johnson seem to abhor her.
In short, opinion with Husk as with all 3 seem to be mixed.

The only thing I've heard that people seem to agree with is that the closed interview process put forward by DeBell as president of the board, as well as the closed media process put forward by district staff, were extremely unfortunate, angering both citizens and the press.

Not a good start for any new superintendent.

I don't expect Crosscut readers would take my word for it. See for yourself on the WS blog

http://westseattleblog.com/2012/04/seattle-public-schools-superintendent-finalists-visit-steven-enoch

I'm not at all surprised by the bias written in Crosscut. I am hoping the article of this piece had not seen this document prior to publishing her article.:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/91249825/Husk-record-at-Salem-Keizer-district

While some prefer higher levels of governances, failing to report problems and outcome to the board under the guise of "privacy" is deeply concerning and dangerous.

I also encourage all to look at Salem-Kaier's School Report. Please pay specific attention to scores related to special needs children, ELL and disadvantaged children- it is deeply concerning. I'm not seeing much in this candidate

Barney is correct. Seattle Public Schools often moves dollars between general fund and capital budgets. I'm not seeing anything unusual here.

Mr. Enoch explained the financial woes..a building was bought against his advice. Furthermore, after Mr. Enoch left...he was able to build up an $80M reserve to see his most recent district through difficult times. Mr. Enoch's later financial management is inconsistent with accusations being thrown at him.

Oops. I meant to say: I hope the author of this article hadn't read the below document prior to publishing this article.

Having kept close tabs on this and watching the videos, I too agree that you are way off base. Enoch and Banda seems like good fits with Enoch getting more points for experience. Husk - no way, no how. She reminded me of Goodloe-Johnson. We have been there done that and don't want a repeat. I too am a SPS parent and I hope the board listens to the parents. We are their customers after all, not Bill Gates.

Note that Mr. Enoch has just announced the withdrawal of his candidacy, saying that he feels the district needs a younger person at the helm.

This is somewhat off subject, but the article in the ST today got me to thinking about why the sudden overcrowding of Seattle's public schools. The speculation that came to me is that the number of children has not substantially changed, what has really changed in the quickened pace of the return to true neighborhood schools, making it them more attractive for both social and economic reasons. Is there any way of getting a handle on this?

@afreeman,

There are three explanations given for the increase in enrollment at Seattle Public Schools. All are probably contributing factors. Let's remember that the overwhelming majority of the enrollment increase has been north of downtown in Seattle's more affluent neighborhoods.

1. The switch to guaranteed assignment to a specific neighborhood school.

2. There was a strong reduction in the "out-migration" of families as a result of the mortgage lending crisis - you can't buy a home in the burbs if you can't get a mortgage.

3. There can be no doubt that the public perception of Seattle's public schools has improved.

Look where the enrollment growth has come. It has been primarily in the most affluent neighborhoods around the higher performing schools.

To note from Coolpapa's comments, this information came via a demographer consultant that the district hired to get a handle on what was happening with its growth when their own in-house demographer couldn't.