A controversial policy that would prevent any individual or group from donating funds to replace core programs at any particular school is proposed by superintendent.
By Michelle Logsdon/Special to The Malibu Times
Teachers, parents and school officials are still in shock after the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District (SMMUSD) Board of Education approved $1.5 million in budget cuts Nov. 21-effective immediately.
“I’m very concerned,” Webster Elementary School Principal Phil Cott said. “Teachers, I and the parents have to live in the moment but we are all worried about the future.”
The changes that went into effect right away included cuts in warehousing (leading to eventual elimination), a hiring freeze, a freeze of the Medicare budget, a program to reduce energy usage by 20 percent plus a 25 percent reduction in SIP budgets and Targeted Instructional Improvement Grant budgets.
This bloodletting is the result of a monumental deficit the district faced after officials were forced to negotiate union contracts and finalize a budget before the state Legislature decided how much to spend on education for the 2002-03 school year. When the expenditures were announced, the amounts were devastatingly low and the district turned to the residents for help.
A last ditch effort was made to make up the shortfall with Proposition EE-a $300 parcel tax that would have netted $8 million for the district’s general fund. But the measure fell short at the polls by approximately 6 percent, leaving all non-core SMMUSD programs vulnerable to cutbacks and possible elimination.
“We went to the portion of the budget where any programmatic piece was supplemented by the general fund,” Superintendent John Deasy said.
On the board agenda, the description of the cuts was minimal, creating confusion for some board members and the public.
“I’ve never seen anything like this in my years in coming to a Board of Education meeting,” said Santa Monica resident Jim Jaffy. “Where is the data to support these cuts? You can’t do it this way, you won’t look good if you do it this way.”
But Deasy explained that district staff had researched the cuts and the board needed to act on the items presented, or the amounts available to save would be different by the next meeting, Dec. 12.
Immediate action was necessary because even more cuts are coming down the pike in early 2003.
“This budget process does not reflect what is widely anticipated to be significant midyear budget reductions from the state of California General Assembly in January or February,” Deasy said.
In order to deal with that financial squeeze, the board also approved several more items to be implemented by Jan. 1, 2003. Those actions include an increase in food service and facility rental fees; elimination of security positions at the elementary schools, and studies to determine money-saving alternatives in the class-size reduction program, the special education departments, the extended day care program, the John Adams Middle School Science Magnet, and the bilingual immersion programs at Edison Elementary School and John Adams Middle School.
Most of the concerns over these cuts centered around not furthering the class-size reduction program.
“It would be an absolute nightmare to lose four or five staff members and see class size go back up,” Principal Cott said.
Laila Taslimi is a second grade teacher at McKinley Elementary School.
“Teacher quality and small class sizes are the two most significant factors in student achievement. It would be unconscionable to even consider repealing class size reduction.”
Reviewing the class-size reduction program and instituting a hiring freeze were not the only actions taken by the board that could affect the number of students in each class. The board also approved a recommendation by Superintendent Deasy to rescind the one-year moratorium on interdistrict permits.
That move would increase the amount of state funds given to the district under the Average Daily Attendance rule by allowing students from outside district boundaries to attend SMMUSD schools, bringing their state monies with them.
After approving all the budget alterations, Deasy asked the board to consider a controversial policy regarding private donations to individual schools. The policy forbids individuals or groups from paying to replace core programs at any one particular school. The program would have to be reinstituted throughout the district.
Several members of the public spoke out against this idea.
Kevin Montgomery, co-president of the Webster Elementary School PTA, believed the plan would negatively affect future donations.
“Many of the people with the ability to help will choose to leave and take our greatest potential to help the whole, then we will have created equity but at the lowest common denominator.”
The board decided to revisit the recommendation after meeting with the major groups potentially affected such as the individual school PTAs.
One more action item was approved concerning another parcel tax ballot initiative. The board will put together a committee to consider approaching voters again in the spring with a new parcel tax ballot measure.
“Voter turnout Nov. 5 in Malibu and Santa Monica was alarmingly low and disappointing,” Cott said. “But now that people have a better idea of the dramatic cuts, it might motivate them to get out and vote.”