An Open Letter to the Santa Monica City Council -- Education Doesn't Look Like Your Top Priority

June 6, 2003

Dear City Council Members:

We can breathe a bit easier now with the tremendous success of "S," yet our community public schools are still facing destructive cuts to programs and personnel; "S" will provide just half of the $13 million needed to maintain present program and staffing levels.

Our schools desperately need for our City Council to double their financial commitment.

Why does this concern you? Isn't it the State's job? Yes. Are they doing their job? NO. There is little hope for a state budget anytime soon, and when it does finally appear it will fall far short of providing the resources necessary to do those things demanded of our public school system.

California's schoolchildren would be fortunate indeed if their political leaders decided to fund education at the NATIONAL AVERAGE -- no frills. Just average.

How important are our public schools to our community? According to the EdSource report The Civic Purposes of Public Schools, "School and curriculum have an enduring impact on the development of civic knowledge." It is essential to the best interests of our community that our public schools be not merely adequate, but excellent.

How important are our public schools to the voting public? Improving education is the top priority for Californians according to a new public opinion survey released on January 31, 2003 by the Center for the Future of Teaching and Learning. Further, the survey reports that 76 percent of Californians, reflecting all demographic groups, say that more should be spent on education.

National surveys report education as the #1 priority too -- ranked ahead of health care, national security, Social Security, job creation and tax cuts.

But until we succeed in making education the top priority of all those politicians who say education is their top priority, we desperately need your commitment. Having been to your budget workshops earlier this year and to your budget study sessions last week, I don't see the City's financial situation precluding increased support for our community schools.

According to your document "FY2003-04 AND FY2004-05 BUDGET REDUCTION IMPACT STATEMENTS you are contemplating cutting 31.8 positions for FY2003-04.

1) 60 percent of these positions are currently vacant.
2) 30 percent result from closure of the Main Library, currently being rebuilt.

You are, in reality, looking at laying-off 4.8 people. Not a pleasant prospect, to be sure. Imagine laying-off 130+ people.

The Council was particularly upset about cuts to Community & Cultural Services, yet all but 1 of the 5.9 FTE's to be eliminated are already vacant. That leaves 2 part-time jobs on the block, one of which was going to go anyway with construction at Virginia Ave. Park. The result: you're losing a .5 FTE Administrative Staff Assistant (As-Needed) in Cultural Affairs.

Having fields renovated less frequently and reducing some arts grants and support for awards & celebrations pales in comparison to what is going to happen at your community schools.

You might respond, "Just because the positions are vacant doesn't mean we don't want to fill them." Sure, but the point is we are already getting along without them. You are trimming what was cut from public schools 25 years ago, and that was only the beginning of many years of drastic reductions in staffing at our schools. Every one of the more than 130 people who are about to lose their jobs in our school district are desperately needed.

Chief James T. Butts, Jr. responded to questions about whether he wasn't understaffed at the Pier and in the Pico neighborhood; he replied that he is at full strength. He's going to lose a couple horses.

Asked about pro-active responses to gang violence in the Pico neighborhood, Chief Butts spoke of a "cycle": criminals get arrested, go through the system, and return after years in jail to old haunts and old habits -- and to teach the next generation.

He spoke of the need for interventions and support in the schools, and I have to point out that our over-crowded classrooms have precious little in the way of counselors, psychologists, assistant principals, tutors, etc. that can help an over-burdened teacher make the difference between success and failure in school.

Anticipated cuts will only make things worse: after-school, "Saturday school", and enrichment classes will be cut. Summer intervention classes are far too crowded, with a too-high pupil-to-teacher ratio.

Libraries and computer labs will be closed -- not only after-school, but in all likelihood during school. Overworked counselors and assistant principals and support staff will be laid off. Teachers would like to outreach -- make home visits -- but how is that possible with a caseload of 150 to 200 students?

As the youngsters experience failure and despair in school, and have no place to go after school except the neighborhood, they become ripe for instruction in the "real" world by the O. G.s. (old gangstas).

Our schools need more resources, not less. Our community pays the price.

You are obviously sick of being asked for money. Understand that when your community looks at your budget of $100s of millions it sees:

• $50 to 60 million go out of the General Fund every year for capital projects,
• $150 million sitting in the Big Blue Bus capital fund (for only $38 million of projects),
• A $70? million police station,
• $34? million for 200? units of low-income housing a couple years ago,
• $10 million yearly to subsidize section 8 housing,
• The endless street & sidewalk "improvements" (no -- they're not all paid for by grants, the General Fund coughs up around $5 million annually),
• $1 million (02-04) to "revitalize" alleys by replacing asphalt with cement,
• $20 million to renovate City Hall (yes, bonds, but they aren't free -- nor is the extra $6 million from the General Fund),
• Grand plans for completely re-doing Santa Monica Place and the Civic Center,
• $30 million to retrofit parking garages,
• An aggressive Redevelopment Agency that skims the cream off property taxes that once went to public schools.

1) You don't look broke
2) Education doesn't look like your top priority

Granted, I don't hear everything that you hear, but from what I hear the budget does not reflect the priorities of your community. You have options:

Revise the budget to reflect education as a real priority Put a fair tax/revenue stream proposal before the voters. You're proud of our bond rating -- use it.

If the City were half as adept at developing a revenue stream for its schools as it is at getting and keeping cash for capital projects, we wouldn't be in this mess.

The City has a financial stake in this too: nearly $20 million of General Fund revenue comes from property tax payments. Research shows that approximately 35 percent of a property's value is derived from the reputation of its local public schools; if the reputation of the School District declines and the bubble bursts, the City stands to lose $7 million yearly.

I am begging you to take this seriously. The State is dysfunctional -- the community is looking to you.

Please consider the context of this request: it is shameful that the world's 5th largest economy is derelict in supporting its schools. We cannot tolerate this. How can we expect Santa Monica's children to compete, let alone reach their full potential with this lack of support?

How can other states spend $12,000 yearly to educate a child, and we spend HALF that much? How do we tell our children that that's all they deserve? There must be a way -- and we are
relying on your leadership to show us the way.