Although not a final vote, five of the seven board members said they support a mandatory gift policy. Malibu’s Mike Jordan was one of the dissenters, calling for a voluntary fund instead.
By Jonathan Friedman/Staff Writer
A majority of the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District Board of Education said it supports Superintendent John Deasy’s mandatory gift policy proposal. The policy requires a percentage of district donations be placed into a fund, with the money in that fund being distributed to all district schools on a weighted system. No final vote was taken, but the board’s direction gave Deasy the signal to continue working toward crafting a final proposal. Those who said they favored a mandatory policy said it was necessary to address inequity in the district.
“We’re looking at some schools that have the year-long, really sound science programs, and you have other schools where they’re sort of nickel and dime-ing to put something together for our students for one hour a week,” Board Member Maria Leon-Vazquez said.
Malibu’s lone representative on the board, Mike Jordan, who announced he was not running for reelection on the board, said a mandatory policy would divide the district, while a voluntary one would bring it together. He said he worried that nonprofit foundations and corporations that give to specific departments such as music and art would choose to stop giving to the district if the policy were made mandatory. Jordan said he was also concerned about a mandatory policy leading to litigation. The only other board member to side with Jordan was Shane McLoud.
“I believe it’s inappropriate to alter someone’s generosity,” McLoud said. “It’s a very clear principle to me … for legal reasons, we don’t have the authority without voter approval to change someone’s contribution. We will have legal challenges. So we’ll find ourselves back here in six months or a year.”
Leon-Vazquez said the proposal is legally sound because of the 1971 and 1976 California Supreme Court decisions, Serrano vs. Priest I and II. It forced the state Legislature to change its method of financing California schools so there would no longer be too large a disparity between the amount of money in the state’s poorest and wealthiest districts. Leon-Vazquez said she hoped parents would not go through with what she said were threats to sue the district, because it would waste district money that could go to students, although she said the district would win in a suit.
Several public hearings have taken place during the past few months on the policy proposal, with large numbers of Malibu parents speaking out against it. The original draft of the proposal called for a 15 percent contribution to the equity fund on all donations, and a 15 percent cash equivalent for all non-monetary donations made. That proposal was revised recently with the 15 percent donation only being required on the first $100,000. The percentage would then be reduced with each $100,000 until it reached zero. Malibu parents still spoke out against that policy, with some saying they will take legal action. McLoud and Jordan said the adoption of a mandatory policy would lead to a reduction in the amount of money given to district.
“We are going to lose much of the amazing generosity that exists in the two cities,” McLoud said.
Board Member Julia Brownley said she categorically believed fundraising would not go down if the policy were adopted.
“Once a mandatory policy is in place, then there will be a natural acceptance of the policy by the current families in the district and the future families,” she said.
Board Member Oscar de la Torre said he hoped people would not stop giving money to schools because of a new gift policy, which he said was the only option to deal with what he called inequality and injustice in the district. De la Torre grew up in Santa Monica’s Pico Neighborhood, a low-income area. He said he saw first-hand the disadvantage children from that area have. De la Torre said the gift policy would not be able to address most of those problems, but he said it would be a good start. He added that making the policy mandatory was the only feasible option.
“I can’t think of too many instances in history where equity or equality was achieved through a voluntary process,” de la Torre said. “I’m reminded of a quote by Frederick Douglas, who said that ‘Power concedes nothing without a demand.’ And money is power.”
De la Torre further suggested the cities of Santa Monica and Malibu earmark funds to go toward closing the inequity of the district’s schools.
Also at the meeting, the board discussed some of the specifics that might go into a final policy. Leon-Vazquez suggested placing some flexibility on donations from foundations that go toward specific departments to address one of Jordan’s concerns. She said since those donations are usually made to respond to inequity such as supporting schools that lack instruments, to penalize them would defeat the purpose. Board Vice President Emily Bloomfield said once the policy is adopted, it should be stressed that it is a pilot program that could be altered. Deasy will bring the board further information for discussion at its March 11 meeting.