The Candidates Address The Issues IV: Santa Monica City Council

Part II: Education & Power

Kathleen Herd Masser
Mirror contributing writer
  
   This week, candidates for City Council talk about education and the balance of power between the Council and City staff.
   Question: What role should the City play in education?
   Linda Armstrong: Pro-active. All needed programs should be funded by City.
   Letitia Anderson: Support it. Education is the key to success. Santa Monica's public school system – along with Santa Monica's City College – is a model of success, let's continue the trend.
   Bill Bauer: We are a wealthy city with many resources. The City should support education as well as help our schools identify, source and acquire outside revenue streams such as grants and fellowships (as it now does for non-resident services providers). In return, I would require periodic audits of School District books, meaningful financial oversight and a detailed plan from the Superintendent as to how the District will maintain an ongoing program of fiscal responsibility. Lastly, municipal support for the schools must be done without cuts or diminishing city services.
   Richard Bloom: The city plays multiple roles in education and I have demonstrated leadership on all of them. Most importantly, I played a pivotal role in bringing $3 million dollars of new funding to our public schools last year. In addition, we fund a multitude of other education-related activities and services for youth, seniors and others – all of which I have actively supported.
   David Cole: The City already plays a very important role in the education of our youth. And the college plays a role with our young adults. I support continued financial support for education. However, I would honor the commitment to meet jointly with the Board of Education and require ongoing financial accountability. The City could be more supportive of continued education for adults and seniors. And our own City TV and Seascape publication could be used far more effectively to assist in the education of the entire community. They are vastly under-utilized resources.
   Matt Dinolfo: The City should ensure abundant and ongoing funding to our public schools that is periodically adjusted for inflation. I also feel a percentage of any increase in city revenues should be devoted to our schools. This ongoing support must be tied to strict financial oversight and independent audits conducted by the City.
   Michael Feinstein: Even though state law does not mandate it and even though only a small number of cities do this statewide, I believe that the City of Santa Monica should provide both direct and indirect support to the School District. I have voted to support every increase in City funding to the School district since I’ve been on the Council, and during that time, we’ve increased the amount of annual funding to the District by 250%.
   I have also supported a wide array of after school programs (like CREST) and other programs that serve youth – including childcare – that complement what goes on inside the classroom. As Mayor, I convened the first-ever joint meeting between the Council and School Board, and we dealt with school parks. I believe in the future we should concentrate on more cooperative land use and ballot measure strategies between the City, School District and College. That would have help us be stronger financially and more successful in terms of community-wide land-use planning.
   Ken Genser: Investment in our kids is the best investment we could ever make. I strongly support the City providing financial assistance to our school district. Since the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978, school funding has been the responsibility of the state. Unfortunately, the state has shirked its responsibility, so the City has stepped in with additional funding. This must remain a priority of the city. As our resources grow, our support for education should increase.
   Patricia Hoffman: Our community, as a whole, benefits from a well-educated populace. Good schools are one of the main reasons that Santa Monica is such a desirable place to live and do business. The City’s role includes providing direct funding of the schools. The City should be a partner to the District. The benefit that accrues goes both ways and the well-being of the City is interconnected with that of the School District.
   Herb Katz: I support the city providing funding to the School District and have been a leader on the Council for that policy, because the education of our youth IS our future and we must provide as much cost-effective support as possible to ensure high-quality schools. The City needs to financially assist our schools until the schools are able to do it themselves. There are numerous areas where increased cooperation between the City and the District could both save money and improve services to the city and its schools, starting with shared maintenance and mutual, centralized supply systems. The schools and city liaison meetings are a fine start and I support expanding this kind of interactive dialogue to benefit our schools.
   Maria Loya: As a product of the public school system, I know that access to a quality education is one of the most important investments we can make as a community. It is a travesty that California is 43 rd in the nation in per-pupil spending. I will work to secure ongoing and sustainable sources of funding to ensure that Santa Monica is providing the best education to all of our students. I have worked with parents in our community to ensure that equity becomes a principle in practice throughout the District. Our efforts have led to increased support for schools that have historically lagged behind in test scores and student achievement. Strong schools lead to strong communities. Parental involvement is key to the success of student educational plans.
   Jonathan Mann: I was a teacher for the Santa Monica-Malibu and Los Angeles Unified School Districts. All City funding for social service programs should be reviewed of effectiveness and audited for accountability, AND available online with a search function! The same for the school system.
   Kathryn Morea: We are very fortunate to live in a city with the wealth and resources of Santa Monica. Like many, I came here because of the stellar reputation of the Santa Monica schools. As your City Council person, I will continue to help fund the schools so our children receive the finest education possible. This needs to be tied to oversight and accountability by the schools. I will encourage a mutually beneficial relationship between the school administration and the City.
   Bobby Shriver: We all need to lobby the State of California to give its public schools more money – as it once did. Under current conditions, the City must help the School District financially. The whole community benefits from excellent public schools—all the way from increased property values, to reduced crime, to the satisfaction that we are giving our youth the opportunity to lead productive, socially responsible lives.
   Question: Do you favor or oppose the suggestion that Malibu separate from the SMMUSD?
   Linda Armstrong: Oppose.
   Letitia Anderson: I do not know enough about this issue to answer at this time. I will make it my personal endeavor to seek an answer.
   Bill Bauer: Although this is not a City Council decision, I would initiate a detailed study from a respected but neutral outside source to determine the feasibility of such a split before supporting or opposing.
   Richard Bloom: As a parent of two SAMOHI students, I have strong opinions about this issue. However, as a council member, I believe it is appropriate to be neutral.
   David Cole: This is a very sad development caused by years of in-fighting in Santa Monica political circles and by the actions of our current Superintendent, who demanded that Malibu give some of the money raised by their PTAs and parents to Santa Monica. I support the Malibu community's desire to be free of the problems of Santa Monica. I wish them well and I apologize for Santa Monica's actions towards your community and children.
   Matt Dinolfo: I do not have enough information concerning the potential effects on public education in both cities to make a valid assessment. If the data indicated that it would not be detrimental to either community and a majority of residents supported the separation, then I would have no objection.
   Michael Feinstein: I believe that is a choice for the education community to make and in particular the education community in Malibu – just as the people of Malibu once debated cityhood.
   Ken Genser: I have not seen an objective analysis of this proposal; it will be studied by the school district in the coming year. I suspect that the study will show that this proposal will negatively affect the resources available to educate our kids. If so, I will actively oppose it.
   Patricia Hoffman: I am against the division of the District into two separate parts. Splitting the District would limit opportunities for education that are now available to all our children. This is particularly obvious at the high school level. Different adolescents thrive in the different types of schools. Now there are choices that families can make from among Santa Monica, Malibu and Olympic Continuation high schools. Keeping all three high schools is good for the youth of our city.
   Herb Katz: I am neutral, although an argument can be made that Santa Monica might be better off financially if the District were split.
   Maria Loya: I believe that the School District should remain united. However, I respect the desire of some parents to engage in a public process to discuss what it would mean to separate from the School District and the impact that it would have on the students' education.
   Jonathan Mann: Jonathan Mann did not respond to this question.
   Kathryn Morea: I understand there is a desire by residents in Malibu to separate from the SMMUSD. The majority of students are located in Santa Monica, making the administration more responsive to the needs of students in Santa Monica. When attending the School Board meeting last week, I listened to those in Malibu who are spearheading this effort. They are taking it to the voters first. They, too, want to ensure that a majority in Malibu are verifiably in favor of separation from SMMUSD before trying to force it on the district. I was encouraged by the analytical process undertaken by residents in Malibu and the supportive response by the School Board. I think this is a wise route to follow.
   Bobby Shriver: As far as I know, no District officials have predicted what effects a split would have on the quality of education delivered to the students, so I can’t answer that question yet. I do know that about 20% of the $6 million Santa Monica will now give to the District will go to wealthier Malibu schools. I’m sure Santa Monica schools could make good use of the extra $1.2 million that would stay here if Malibu formed its own district.
   Question: Under the City Charter, City staff has a great deal of authority. Do you approve, or do you think the Charter should be changed to give more authority to the City Council and/or the public?
   Linda Armstrong: Yes.
   Letitia Anderson: Although it is desirable to possess a talented city staff, democracy works through public participation. I would not necessarily delegate less to city staff, but rather work to increase more public participation.
   Bill Bauer: The City works just fine, charter wise. We’re in trouble because of personal political agendas that are counter to the wishes of the majority. It’s better to change the City Council by electing four NEW persons such as myself who will carry out the desires of the people and not waste time and precious resources on a pie-in-the-sky Utopian social agenda that continually ignores the real needs of residents.
   Richard Bloom: The current system maintains an appropriate balance and works well for the community. We must continue to emphasize and enhance broad public input.
   David Cole: I think the City Charter is fine. Your questions is incorrect in its premise. The City staff has ultimately the authority given them by the City Manager. The Charter does not speak to their degree of final authority. I suspect the community might like to consider term limits someday, but otherwise the City Manager/City Council form of government works for Santa Monica.
   Matt Dinolfo: I believe the City Charter should be amended to give more authority over day-to-day operations to the City Council. This would make the council members more accountable to the everyday needs and priorities of Santa Monica’s residents.
   Michael Feinstein: I support the separation of legislative and administrative powers that our current form of government provides. It is the job of City Councilmembers to enact legislation and it is the job of staff to carry out those mandates. I would not want to change that balance. However, I do not believe that Council members have all of the tools they need. This is a complex city and being a part-time City Council member naturally limits what one can do in terms of being responsive to the community and playing an oversight role over City government. To redress this imbalance, I would like to see Council members have part-time staff like West Hollywood does. This would give Council members more tools to do their jobs well. West Hollywood has a similar form of City Council/City Manager government and it works well there.
   Ken Genser: The city council currently has the authority it needs to give direction to the city staff; in my view the council has not always been willing to exercise the authority it has. I will never by shy about speaking out on what needs to be done.
   Patricia Hoffman: I served on the Charter Review Commission from 1989-1991. We examined the City Manager form of government and did not recommend a change. Giving the Council more power would entail giving them their own staff. Serving on Council would become a fulltime job. This is expensive and does not necessarily improve outcomes.
   Consequently, I don’t think that the Charter should be changed. The public needs to tell the Council what it wants. The Council then sets policy and passes ordinances, hires and fires key employees, and prioritizes the budget to reflect community needs. The staff decides how to carry out the mandate. Staff must be responsive to the needs of the public in its implementation plan. New programs and processes need to be evaluated. There should be a public component to that evaluation. It’s great if the program meets expectations. If not, it should be improved or dropped.
   Herb Katz: As the elected policy-makers for the City, the Council should set municipal priorities and the staff should carry them out. Unfortunately, many of the problems that have arisen are because the current Council majority has adopted a policy of micro-management on many issues and has hired staff members dedicated to carrying out that policy with far too much zeal. Thus decisions often seem to be based on individual whims and preferences, rather than a determination of what's good for the City as a whole.
   Certain departments would benefit greatly from specific changes in attitude and process. The level of service provided by the city's Planning and Building & Safety departments is inadequate, often confusing, frustrating and non-responsive. This creates delays and a growing file backlog that prevents us from expanding and improving the City's housing stock. At the same time, staff needs adequate space to work, which they do not have.
   The Council needs to set resident service as the top priority and then to hire staff who are dedicated to that high level of resident service. The bottom line is that city staff must understand their job is to be helpful – not just to say "no" – and our ordinances need to be flexible so we can get away from the current atmosphere of over-control. That doesn't require a Charter Amendment, it requires a Council majority more interested in service to the public than in enforcing its own whims.
   Maria Loya: I would like to first acknowledge the work and contributions that the City staff offers in assisting our City Council in the decision making process. As in every government, it is important to have checks and balances to effectively govern. We all should play a role in how decisions are made. City staff provide the information necessary to make informed decisions and the public should have an opportunity to weigh in on staff recommendations. Ultimately, it is up to the Council to make a determination as to the best decision for the general public. The issue is not who has the most authority, but rather public participation taken seriously in making decisions. I strongly believe the public needs to be an active participant in any decision making process. Public participation is the foundation of our democratic governing system.
   Jonathan Mann: Developers, merchants and city employees have more to say about what affects this city than residents, which is why I intend to empower residents via the electronic interface. I am not satisfied with the workforce of this city. Incompetence is too often protected from accountability; the expression, "good enough for government work" is unfortunately true in some cases. We have some very dedicated civic servants but many employees are complacent and "by the book".
   Kathryn Morea: The City Charter is sufficient. City staff do need authority to make decisions in carrying out plans as set forth by City Council. I believe it's important to hire the right people and then get out of their way.
   Bobby Shriver: The public and the Council need more authority. Using the “hedge crackdown” as an example: The City spent an inordinate amount of time and money photographing and citing hedge owners and threatening $25,000-per-day fines. Even though this was an extreme departure from existing City policy and obviously upsetting to many residents, most of the council members told me they did not even know it was happening! This is a symptom of a much larger problem.