Dear Editor,
I am writing to address several inaccuracies in the recent communications from Santa Monica School District (SMMUSD) regarding the City of Malibu’s decision to resume our petition for unification. As the Mayor Pro Tem of Malibu, and a member of the Subcommittee for School Separation, I have firsthand knowledge of these events and wish to provide clarity to the community.
First, the District claims that our request to the County Committee to schedule hearings on our 2017 petition is premature and contrary to the agreed timeline. White it’s true that both parties agreed to a general timeline in May, which included a “Community Engagement on the Full Unification Package” for July, this engagement did not occur because the parties have been stuck in a deadlock. The last few mediation sessions were significantly unproductive, highlighted by the fact that only one of the three District subcommittee board members attended. Not only were key members not attending our mediation sessions, but it was clear that the District team was not meeting regularly and was not prepared to use our limited mediation time productively. After the parties failed to meet the initial goals of the timeline, we recognized that the November target dates were no longer feasible. Consequently, we determined that returning to the County Committee was the best use of our resources to ensure a timely and fair resolution.
In their communications, SMMUSD implied that our decision to return to the County Committee process signifies an abandonment of collaborative efforts. This is far from the truth. We have consistently communicated to the District—and continue to maintain—that we are willing to attend any and all future mediation sessions.
However, SMMUSD has refused to continue mediation unless we withdraw our request to the County Committee. This ultimatum is unacceptable. Malibu residents and students have waited many years for separation. We were patient while the District addressed the CVRA petition last year, but we can no longer accept delays. Both parties have publicly agreed that separation is in the best interest of all students. These efforts must proceed promptly, either through mediation or the County Committee process.
It is important to note that the City of Malibu is fully committed to the guiding principles adopted as part of our term sheet. We believe that the formation of an independent Malibu Unified School District is in the best interest of all students, and we are dedicated to ensuring that each successor education entity receives adequate funding to provide a similar level of service as before separation. The District’s claim that we are bound by our 2017 Petition misrepresents the next steps. We stand by our petition and will supplement it with an updated feasibility study demonstrating compliance with the nine criteria in the Education Code (section 35753). While recent sessions have been challenging, the overall process has been valuable to identifying a sound fiscal path forward. It would be unwise and irresponsible to disregard this. We aim to present these principles to the County Committee through our feasibility study, and we hope the District will join us in this effort.
Lastly, the City of Malibu values the patience and support of our community as we strive for an independent Malibu Unified School District that serves the best interests of all students. We are committed to transparency and fairness in this process and welcome any further discussions with SMMUSD to achieve this goal.
Marianne Riggins
Mayor Pro Tem
City of Malibu