Skip to content

Malibu school district effort suffers setback

Published:

Malibu district gains momentum

By GENEVA WHITMARSH Daily Press Staff Writer

MALIBU — Weeks after hundreds of signatures collected in support of breaking Malibu away from the local school district were thrown out due to county problems with the petition, a group of parents say they can still collect the 3,000 required signatures by the self-imposed Nov. 2 deadline.

If the Malibu Unified School Team has its way, a new Malibu school district will be established with $12 million of annual operating fees coming from a revenue base of roughly $14 million.

But the group was dealt a blow three weeks ago when the county nixed the petition’s wording and requested that a map be redesigned, deeming the collected signatures invalid. The petition had already been approved at the state level and had been in circulation for about five days.

“I’m very accepting about what is,” said Tom Sorce, president of the team. “It’s discouraging when the language is OK for one body but not the other, but who knew?”

“I’m very accepting about what is. It’s discouraging when the language is OK for one body but not the other, but who knew?” — Sorce said. – TOM SORCE Team president

The petition was quickly reworked, then sent back to Los Angeles county officials for review. It’s expected to be returned in the next week, at which time supporters will begin a vigorous signing campaign that will include neighborhood canvassing.

“We’re pressing the county everyday,”
“The day we get (the petition) back, we’re going to be off getting signatures.”

What the split would mean for Santa Monica is unclear. The plan would take an estimated $20 million from the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District’s $102 million budget, but would also allow a $6 million annual contribution from Santa Monica City Hall to pour directly into local schools. Currently, Malibu receives roughly 20 percent of that funding. Last month, a majority of school board members voted to affix their signatures to the petition before it was sent to county officials, but most have remained impartial, saying that it’s a matter for voters to ultimately decide. Candidates for the school board also have said little about the idea other than that they support a split if it becomes apparent that it’s in the best interest of students.

Organizers first unveiled their plans for the split at an invitation-only party for Malibu education leaders on Aug. 1. About 90 people attended the event, most of them expressing support for the plan.

Sorce said the signatures collected before the petitions were deemed invalid were the result of about five days, making him optimistic that the 3,000 signatures will be gathered without any problem. Still, Sorce said he does occasionally hear concerns from people worried that the split may not be the right choice for the city.

“The concern I hear the most often is, ‘can we afford this and will our taxes increase?’” Sorce said. “Our research indicates we can support a separate district with existing revenue streams and no tax increase.”

A study on the split indicates that with about $12 million in daily attendance dollars and an estimated lump sum of $8 million in other funds, the district could be self supporting, said Thomas M. Griffin, a Sacramento educator and former counsel for the State Board of Education, who was hired to complete a 27-page analysis of the proposal.

Sorce said he also hears concern from teachers who are worried that the terms of their existing contracts would no longer be valid should a split occur. The teachers, for example, are currently eligible for interdistrict transfers. There also are questions surrounding students who are in Malibu by permit but live outside of the area.

“There are some concerns,” said Susan Holley, a Malibu parent. “We’re doing our best to address them.”

The group also is anxious to begin collecting signatures — again.

“We’re excited about the prospect,” she said. “We already have a lot of support at different levels, both young and old.”

Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on September 23, 2004. Read the original PDF.

Comments

Sign in or become a SMDP member to join the conversation.

Sign in or Subscribe