By PATRICIA HOFFMAN is the co-chair of Santa Monicans for Renters’ Rights.
I WOULD LIKE TO RESPOND TO CRAIG Hamilton’s comments in a recent letter to the editor (“Our community deserves better, page 4, Aug. 27) by first sharing my personal viewpoint and then adding background and comments from the perspective of my role as the co-chair of Santa Monicans for Renters’ Rights.
I agree with Craig Hamilton in his letter that the special education group was within its rights to organize and show up and vote as a block at the SMRR convention. Special education needs all of the advocacy that it can get since it has, over the years, often been treated poorly within the [school] district. Kids with special needs require special resources.
I want to apologize to Craig. He and his family have spent many years advocating for the needs of special education. I am sorry that our actions as the SMRR Steering Committee have caused pain to him, and by extension, others.
I have been involved with special education since the early ‘80s. One of my sons was a special education student many years and another received services for 3 years. Even when I was a member of the Board of Education I found going through the process of identification and placement battering. … There were some particularly bad practices in the district with the requirement of secrecy clauses. Parents are the chief advocates for their children. This requires diligence, persistence, and the freedom to talk to any and everyone that can be of help. It is often difficult and painful to advocate for the needs of your child. It makes you feel exposed and vulnerable. My heart goes out to all of the families who still have to fight for their children.
It was certainly not the intention of the Steering Committee to make special education parents feel maligned, marginalized or diminished in any way. Our Special Education DAC, and our district as a whole, has benefited from the talent and expertise among its members.
However, I do believe that our action in supporting [board member and school board candidate] Jose [Escarce] was correct. He has done an excellent job as a school board member, though relying on the former deputy superintendent was a mistake. Jose has apologized publicly, more than once, for that mistake. The value of that apology will be judged by how he moves forward.
Our by-laws are adopted in a democratic process by a vote of our membership. The SMRR Steering Committee acted within our by-laws by adding him to our list of supported candidates.
In fact, a large majority of those voting at the convention agreed with us — he received 54.9 percent of the vote. He was 1/10th of a percent short. Our by-laws require 55 percent at the convention; the very same document allows the Steering Committee to add positions on candidates or initiatives.
Often it is the case that a group of members organize to support or oppose one of the candidates seeking our endorsement. Sometimes they are successful and sometimes they are not.
That is all part of our organization and how we do business. The addition of a candidate or ballot measure by the Steering Committee is also part of our organization and how we do business. I find it difficult to criticize one practice without criticizing the other.
SMRR members and leadership have been deeply committed to our children and our schools for many years. SMRR came into being 30 years ago to protect tenants from eviction and allow them to age in place and in peace. We remain vigilant today in our attempts to protect tenants from the frequent threats like the recently defeated Proposition 98.
About 25 years ago, an education advocacy group called Committee for a Responsive School Board arose within SMRR. CRSB elected Connie Jenkins and Mary Kay Kamath as our first school board members in April of 1981. At the time, the college and the [school district] were under the governance of one board.
CRSB and SMRR were the earliest advocates for money from the city going to the [schools]. Denny Zane, Judy Abdo, Connie Jenkins and Ralph Mechur helped create the rationale used to show that the well being of the city was dependent on the education of its children.
Education became the second plank of the SMRR platform. Since that time SMRR and its leadership have participated in every general obligation bond and parcel tax issue. Families politically identified with SMRR have been part of every Santa Monica PTSA and PTA and on most if not all of the district advisory committees.
We are also an organization with mass meetings, a Steering Committee and a set of by-laws. Our by-laws empower the Steering Committee to support candidates and issues that are not endorsed at the conventions. We have done it before and will, undoubtedly, do it again.
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on September 4, 2008. Read the original PDF.