Critics: Find own donors
The local school board hopes to decide on Thursday whether the wealthiest schools in the district should be forced to share some of their cash with other schools.
After hearing dozens of impassioned speeches from school boosters on both sides of a divisive gift-sharing proposal this week, local educators agreed to determine whether sharing private donations should become mandatory.
Put forward by Superintendent John Deasy, the proposal would force every school in Santa Monica and Malibu to place a percentage of private contributions into a central fund, which then would be redistributed to schools based on their size and need. The money would be taken from the schools on a diminishing scale, starting at 15 percent for the first $100,000 in donations. A maximum of $64,000 would be taken — if the school raised $800,000.
Dozens of parents and other school boosters addressed the issue at the most recent board meeting. Deasy said the matter will be discussed by board members on Thursday, with little or no input from the public. The board has already devoted nearly seven hours of meeting time to the proposal.
Critics contend the proposal will quell the enthusiasm of potential donors, who pump millions of dollars into Santa Monica and Malibu area schools, considered among the best in the state. Supporters, meanwhile, maintain equity is a fundamental principle of democracy, adding the plan doesn’t do enough for poorer schools.
Susan Holley, a parent of two at Juan Cabrillo Elementary School in Malibu, said the proposal is poorly thought out. She said Santa Monica schools have a wealth of potential donors, and they shouldn’t look to Malibu schools for help.
“John Deasy doesn’t get out and fundraise for those schools,” Holley said. “He’d rather sit up in his ivory tower and draft tax policies.
“John Deasy doesn’t get out and fundraise for those schools. He’d rather sit up in his ivory tower and draft tax policies.” — — SUSAN HOLLEY Malibu parent
“It’s not South Central. Santa Monica is a very rich city, and we were shocked to hear that these schools are not getting funding from their community,” she added. “The amount of money we raise is so small compared to the amount they could raise, with those corporations and organizations out there.”
Juan Cabrillo Elementary raised about $140,000 last year, Holley said. Under Deasy’s proposal, about $20,000 of that would be redirected to the equity fund, meaning the school may have to lay off its computer aide and art teacher, she added. What’s more, Holley contended the gift-sharing proposal may be illegal.
“It appears that the policy is a pretty clear violation of the First Amendment,” Holley said after addressing the board. “The U.S. Supreme Court, since 1939, has been giving very strong protections to charities — both religious and non-religious — that are trying to raise funds... The process of soliciting funds is protected by the First Amendment and anything that the state might do to intrude upon those rights is seen to be a violation of the First Amendment.”
Opponents called the proposal “modest” and said it doesn’t go far enough towards helping to assure that children in the district receive equitable educations.
To illustrate the discrepancy in funding, McKinley Elementary in Santa Monica raised about $30,000 from donors last year, while Pt. Dume Elementary in Malibu pulled in $300,000 or more, school district officials said. At Malibu High School, the stated goal for fundraising is $1 million each year.
“Equality of opportunity is a right that each child is entitled to and no donor has the right to expect the school system to set aside that fundamental right in order to receive their donation,” said Denny Zane, former mayor and co-chair of Santa Monicans for Renters Rights, long City Hall’s ruling party.
Asked what he thinks of the argument that the proposal will discourage donors, Zane replied, “I think that has very, very little merit. Two reasons — one, the parents who are giving because of their desire to contribute something to their own child’s classroom will continue to have that motivation. It doesn’t remove that motivation.
3A3,“Number two, the amount of funds that would be included in the equity fund is such a small amount... it is unlikely to have any kind of serious quelling effect.”
Superintendent John Deasy characterized some of the testimony against the proposal as disingenuous, saying he was “aghast” when a parent produced a letter from a Wells Fargo president, which the parent said showed corporate sponsors are against the policy. Deasy said the parent’s point was off mark, because a copy of the letter shows the contributions went to Malibu schools that already raise large amounts of money.
Deasy is looking forward to Thursday’s meeting.
“It’s an issue that has been around for decades,” he said. “It’s an issue that the community has been acutely aware of and tried to deal with on numerous occasions.
“If we are a community that truly believe in access and equity — as stated in our plan — we need to try to do something about that.”
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on February 21, 2004. Read the original PDF.