I find that looking up something and finding something else on the journey is the way I acquire a great part of the information I amass. In seeking out an argument against a local Malibu newspaper editor calling Measure EE a no-brainer, I discovered the following opinion and comments published in the Santa Monica Daily Press. The writer is Bill Bauer, a component of the group who opposed the recently defeated Measure EE. Mr. Bauer states “…another surprise had to do with the failure of school supporters to pass a $300 parcel tax increase. While I’m sure the school and Measure EE supporters think this is a disaster, it’s really a “Phoenix rising” opportunity.
With the possibility of a special election coming as early as next March, there’s time for district supporters to re-group and present a “good” school tax proposal to the voters.
Last June, the district ad hoc advisory committee was advised that $300 was more than was really needed. Even lifelong learning advocate Louise Jaffe warned, “Older people will choke (on $300),” according to press reports.
They and the school board also ignored a suggestion for a low-income exemption.
Bottom line: A $300 increase was too much for a lot of people to swallow and that’s why EE went down.
Some voters had issues with district management and the arrogance of those advising and supervising the district. It didn’t help that EE supporters were spending over $160,000-compared to the “No on EE” group’s $700 outlay. School board member-elect Shane McLoud, who seems to have more common sense than the rest of the board put together, said it best when he told the Daily Press, Nov. 6, 2002, that we need to look at why this didn’t work and why the community rejected it.”
The Malibu Issue Steering Committee’s general membership has a similar opinion as Mr. Bauer. MISC want what’s best for the schools. We propose “No Blank Check” for the SMMUSD’s general fund. MISC would like to see answerability and accountability in the measure. A parcel tax that is fair and distributes the tax burden uniformly. A measure that taxes big property owners greater than little ones. A measure that gives low-income property owners and those on fixed incomes a break, as they do in other communities, like Berkley. A phrasing that guarantees certain percentages of money raised will go to arts, sciences, music and other classroom disciplines as promised by supporters of Measure Y, but never achieved. There are other ways to raise money than to just keep taxing residents and property owners. The school board president and board members should seek out corporations or and other big money businesses or entertainment professional and asking them to endow a chair in the music or arts department. Should Malibu and Santa Monica cities dig deeper into their budgets and provide more funding as well as assist in obtaining grants for our kids instead of spending tax money on social engineering and pet causes, like more open space? This is a great opportunity for our schools to stand out, but will school leadership and school supporters rise to the occasion and present a request to the voters that they can live with?
Give us such a school tax measure, then let the voter determine if it is needed. Do not do what school board president Julia Brownley stated that “we’ll put it right back on the ballot until it passes.” SMMUSD Voters are not as dim-witted as she thinks and Measure EE was rejected because it was a brainer.
And that is all I have to say.
Tom Fakehany, chair
Malibu Issues Steering Committee