> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.smdp.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# ———— EDITORIAL ———— Education should be transparent
- URL: https://www.smdp.com/editorial-education-should-be-transparent/
- Published: 2007-08-09T15:00:00.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-24T02:32:46.000Z
- Author: Guest Author
- Tags: Opinion, Malibu, #archive-import

*School leaders desperately need lesson in hard knocks*

Talk ain’t cheap, at least, not when it comes to the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District. There, it costs taxpayers roughly $7.2 million.

That’s the amount the district will receive this fiscal year from the city of Santa Monica, including the $530,000 that was kept from them by City Council in efforts to coax district leaders to operate in a manner that was more transparent — striking against the practice of confidentiality agreements with parents of Special Ed students and at least one high-ranking official who left the district a year ago shrouded in secrecy.

The symbolic attempt to send a message to district leaders by City Council has apparently fallen on deaf ears. The lesson of the day is show me, don’t tell me.

Tonight, the Board of Education is expected to appoint Ralph Mechur as the newest member of the elected body, filling the seat vacated by Emily Bloomfield on June 28\. By all accounts, Mechur seems like a good fit for the board. The problem is that we’ll have to take his fellow members’ word for it.

Following Bloomfield’s departure, the board decided it would forego the practice of holding an election to fill the seat and appoint the candidate of their choosing. While the decision may have been fiscally sound, given the costs of a special election, the process need not eliminate input from the taxpaying public altogether.

Mechur and another candidate were interviewed by the board on July 19 at a meeting that was hardly publicized. The Daily Press was just one of the local newspapers not made aware of the “public” meeting through the usual channels of press releases and postings on the district Web site. Indeed, on Wednesday, the district meeting calendar on www.smmusd.org was devoid of any mention of the July 19 session.

On top of that, a City Council member expressed his frustration to this newspaper regarding the board’s process, wondering aloud if the decision was made outside the public light. If a member of our City Council remains skeptical still of the district’s attempts to operate with more transparency, after their symbolic vote in May to keep funding from the district, what are the city’s residents to think? You know, the residents — those parents and neighbors who campaign tirelessly to sway the council to keep upping the ante and give more money to the district.

Maybe next time, the council’s message should be less symbolic and more substantive, because while the district’s latest moves are insulting to those footing the bill, they are hardly surprising.

*Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on August 9, 2007.* [Read the original PDF.](https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/smdp%5Fbackissues/080907.pdf?ref=smdp.com)