|












|
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. |
|