Malibu representation on school board at stake
It was a packed house at Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District headquarters in Santa Monica on Feb. 10 as the public had the final opportunity to weigh in on a proposal to use trustee area voting to elect school board members.
A petition to vote by geographic areas instead of at-large elections could give Malibu a stronger chance at representation on the board. Since Malibu makes up only just over a seventh of the population of the district, the SMMUSD board is controlled by Santa Monica interests. At times there has been no Malibu voice on the board leading to the long, drawn-out separation of the districts still yet to be finalized.
Malibu voting rights attorney Kevin Shenkman filed the petition with the Los Angeles County Committee on School District Organization (LACCSDO), to implement trustee area elections “in furtherance of the purposes of the California Voting Rights Act.”
The Santa Monica political establishment appears to be strongly opposed to implementing voting districts claiming everything from disenfranchising voters to gerrymandering. Opponents argue that three different maps submitted by the petitioner (Shenkman) carved the districts into neighborhoods that are non-contiguous, such as Malibu’s Sunset Mesa with Santa Monica’s Sunset Park neighborhood or western Malibu with Santa Monica’s north of Montana and Wilmot neighborhoods. However, Shenkman, representing Malibu interests, has contended one Malibu district underrepresents Malibu voters. He hired a demographer to draw up two additional maps proposing two non-contiguous districts reminding that the district currently is now the only non-contiguous district in the state, barring Catalina Island in the Long Beach district, and also currently not legal in California.
SMMUSD attorney Dale Larson called the proposed maps the “Al Capone of maps.” Larson claimed they contained numerous illegalities, not respecting geographic integrity of neighborhoods, being in favor of more distant populations, and discriminating against incumbents on the board. Larson also asserted that the Malibu has actually been overrepresented on the SMMUSD board in the past relative to its population. “I hear what they’re saying about their concerns, [but] the law doesn’t work that way … it’s a non-contiguous gerrymander to increase Malibu power,” Larson said.
Some Santa Monica residents favor trustee area voting including Santa Monica Northeast Neighbors Chair Tricia Crane, who said, “Residents across the city are concerned about the lack of fiscal accountability by the current school board, which was elected at-large … it’s time for the election of school board members to be conducted in a manner that gives representation to all neighborhoods,” adding that those who are opposed to at-large face a “culture of intimidation.”
Many speakers opposed the splitting of some Santa Monica neighborhoods including Santa Monica City Councilmember Gleam Davis, went as far as calling a map an “abomination.”
“It breaks up communities of interest within the Santa Monica city boundaries,” Davis said. “North of Montana, Ocean Park, Sunset Park, Mid-City, all of these areas have very specific needs … and this map completely ignores [them] in the interest of promoting the interest[s] of some folks in Malibu. That is certainly within their prerogative, but it is not legal … I don’t think you have any option other than to reject this map.”
Splitting Santa Monica neighborhoods could be of concern to five current school board members who all live in the same Santa Monica neighborhood since only one member can be elected from each district.
Santa Monica City Councilmember Oscar de la Torre, who served on the SMMUSD board for 18 years, said, “those in power support the status quo and want nothing to change. They support the at-large election system … at-large elections [have been] used as a tool to marginalize voters of color throughout the country, and this is also true for the city of Santa Monica.”
Asked for comment, Shenkman emailed The Malibu Times: “I think what these hearings have demonstrated more than anything is that SMMUSD is deeply divided, both within Santa Monica and between Malibu and Santa Monica. That is why we need trustee-area elections for SMMUSD — so that all groups are represented. The group holding the power in Santa Monica is desperate to maintain that power, twisting to identify themselves as progressive while taking the ultra-regressive stance of opposing the voting rights of 40 million Californians.”
There are 11 members of LACCSDO that will make the decision. Two members, Barry Snell and Ralph Mechur, are former SMMUSD board members, and were appointed to the commission by former LA County Supervisor Sheila Kuehl. Snell and Mechur have already voted against a separate Malibu school district.