Committee’s Initial Rejection of Malibu’s Petition Faces Procedural Challenge
A Los Angeles County committee narrowly voted to reject a proposal to create an independent Malibu Unified School District, citing significant financial and educational risks to the existing Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District. However, procedural errors have prompted the committee to schedule a revote, extending the contentious debate over the 2017 petition.
The Los Angeles County Committee on School District Organization voted 6-5 on April 2, 2025, to recommend denying the City of Malibu’s petition to form a standalone Malibu Unified School District (MUSD), according to an email sent to SMMUSD parents. The decision followed a comprehensive feasibility study by the Los Angeles County Office of Education (LACOE), which concluded that the proposal fails to meet eight of nine state criteria required for district unification.
The LACOE study, presented at the April 2 meeting, warned that separating Malibu from the SMMUSD would jeopardize the fiscal stability of the resulting Santa Monica Unified School District, potentially leading to significant cuts in staff and programs. It highlighted concerns including insufficient student enrollment in Malibu, projected at 1,063 compared to the required 1,501, and the risk of increased racial and ethnic segregation.
Dr. Allison Deegan, LACOE’s Business Advisory Services Coordinator, emphasized during the presentation that the split would cause a “tremendous deficit” for Santa Monica, according to the SMMUSD email. The study projects the loss of Malibu’s high-value property tax base and parcel tax revenue, threatening SMMUSD’s status as a basic aid district, which relies primarily on local taxes rather than state funding.
Committee member Estefany Castaneda, representing the second supervisorial district, voted to deny the petition, arguing it lacks a fair plan for fiscal and educational equity. “Public education is about shared responsibility,” Castaneda said in the SMMUSD email. “A reorganization that allows one city to take its wealth and walk away, without a full, fair plan, violates the principles of fiscal justice and educational equity.”
The City of Malibu, which has pushed for the split since 2015, argues that its distinct community identity and geographic separation from Santa Monica justify an independent district. The LACOE study notes Malibu’s claims of inadequate representation on the SMMUSD board and concerns over the distance to district offices. However, the study found no evidence of educational deficiencies in SMMUSD, which boasts a 95% graduation rate compared to the state’s 84.7%.
The April 2 vote followed hours of public testimony, with Malibu residents advocating for local control and Santa Monica stakeholders warning of adverse impacts. Jon Kean, an SMMUSD Board of Education member, praised the committee’s focus on the state criteria, stating in the email, “The committee majority understood the task at hand to focus on the nine criteria required for unification and how it failed to meet eight of the nine criteria.”
However, the decision was clouded by procedural issues. An initial motion to approve the petition was followed by a substitute motion to deny it, but LACOE legal counsel later determined that the committee skipped a step to formally accept the substitute motion, according to the SMMUSD email. On April 4, the committee announced it would retake the vote at its May 7, 2025, meeting in Downey, scheduled for 9:30 a.m.
Kean expressed confidence that the revote would uphold the denial, noting, “Nothing has changed in terms of altering the inequitable petition from the City.” The SMMUSD email encourages community members to attend the meeting or submit comments to LACOE via email (Bernstein_Victoria@lacoe.edu (mailto:_Victoria@lacoe.edu)) or voicemail (562-922-6131), pending confirmation of whether public comment will be allowed.
The SMMUSD Board of Education plans to discuss alternative options and updated agreements at its April 23, 2025, meeting, signaling ongoing efforts to address Malibu’s interests while protecting Santa Monica students. The LACOE study acknowledges nine years of negotiations between Malibu and SMMUSD, which have failed to resolve key financial disputes, including the division of assets and liabilities.
If denied, Malibu could appeal to the State Board of Education, which holds final authority over district unifications. Approval would require further state review, environmental analysis, and a potential election, prolonging the process.
