A Peek at School Board’s Ladera Resolution

            Financially, this transfer is a good deal for Culver City.

            But we need our elected representatives to concentrate on what benefits this proposed transfer will bring to the Culver City School District and to Culver City. 

            Since the County Education Committee’s report has answered many of the unknowns that led the School Board to pass its resolution opposing the transfer, we now have the necessary information to revisit and start an informed community discussion on the proposed transfer.

            Hopefully, this would lead to a better-informed decision by the  School Board.

            It is one thing for some members of the School  Board to play Hide ‘n Seek with the public about their District-paid benefits. But it is quite another to conspire to withhold positive, pertinent information about the transfer from community.

            If the School Board thinks the addition of almost a

billion dollars (nearly a twenty percent increase) in the School District’s tax-base and letting taxpayers save millions on the $95.6M still owed on Measure T, are not sufficient cause to revisit a new resolution, possibly favorably, how much is enough? t

            (As you read the resolution below, keep in mind that my comments are bold-faced.)

 

 

 

            Whereas the CCUSD is responsible for ensuring the highest quality education for all of its students, and

 

            Whereas the CCUSD desires to maintain the integrity of its existing boundaries despite the Ladera Heights Civic Association’’s Petition for the Transfer of Territory from the IUSD to the CCUSD to the Superintendent of the Los Angeles County Office of Education (LACOE), and

 

            Whereas neither LACOE nor the Ladera Heights Civic Association has provided accurate information regarding the number of students in portions of Ladera Heights who would be transferred to CCUSD if the transfer were approved.  (The L.A. County Committee on School District Reorganization’s report last month answered many of the unknowns and concerns that caused the School Board to vote unanimously last October to oppose the Ladera Heights transfer.)

 

            Whereas without accurate information, the CCUSD cannot properly evaluate the potentially large influx of students from Ladera Heights and the costs associated with such a transfer in a variety of areas, including the following: (The "influx" would be three hundred and seventy-seven students. The Committee, on page 36, suggested that Culver City could control cost increases by reducing its acceptance of out-of-district permits to accommodate the proposed increase of three hundred and seventy-seven permanent, resident students from Ladera Heights.)

            a) The transfer’s impact on staffing resources. (On page 35, the conclusion states the transfer would promote sound education performance and would not significantly disrupt Culver City educational programs.)

            b) The transfer’s impact on existing facilities. (Page 25 states no school facilities are within the petition area, and there is no school property to be divided.)

   

            c) The transfer’s impact on maintenance and supplies; (Page 36’s conclusion states that there would be no increase in school housing costs.)

            d) The transfer’s impact on the health and welfare of existing and new students.  (What is this supposed to mean?  What are they trying to say?  That the transfer of Ladera Heights’ students would be unsafe or unhealthy?)

            Whereas the unknown number of potential new students coming to the School District (three hundred and seventy-seven) makes it impossible to determine the traffic and safety impacts on local streets both adjacent to school sites and along routes between Culver City and Ladera Heights. (There would be no busing involved by Culver City. It would be more likely that Ladera Heights’ parents would form neighborhood carpools moreso than the now-uncoordinated, far-flung permits being accepted by the School District.)

 

            Whereas the unknown number of potential new students requiring special education coming to the District makes it impossible to determine the costs of providing special education and related services to those students.  (Is the School Board suggesting that the Inglewood District is hiding special ed students in this transfer? Or that it has been negligent in adequately testing the three hundred and seventy-seven Ladera Heights’ students and in recognizing their needs for Special Ed?)

            Whereas the territory transfer has the potential to disrupt the existing community identity of Culver City. (If Ladera Heights were to come into the Culver City umbrella, they would only elect School Board member. They could not vote for city offices.  They are coming into the School District not to live in the city.  If this transfer were to go through, shouldn’t they have a say in how their new School District tax money is spent?)

 

            Whereas the territory transfer could disrupt and negatively impact the educational setting and finances of CCUSD.  (The Committee states on pages 35, 36 and 37 that the transfer would promote sound educational performance, that there would be no increase in school housing costs, and that the proposed reorganization would have little impact on existing property taxes.)

            Whereas the territory transfer could have a negative effect on the sound financial policies of CCUSD by increasing expenses and perhaps requiring the costly addition of new school facilities. (Once again, the Committee, on page 36, stated that there would be no increase in school housing costs because the School District could control cost increases by reducing the out-of-district permits it now accepts by three hundred and seventy-seven.)

 

            Whereas the CCUSD continues to study additional and significant impacts on the CCUSD and the City of Culver City in general and the student populations in particular from the proposed territory transfer.

 

            Now therefore be it resolved that the Board of Education of the CCUSD opposes the unnecessary Petition for Territory Transfer from IUSD to CCUSD, (Unnecessary? Isn’t that up to the Ladera Heights’ parents to decide?)  and be it further resolved that the Board of Education of the CCUSD directs its staff to take all appropriate steps to study and document opposition to the County Committee and, if necessary, the State Board of Education (Do these "appropriate steps" include not releasing the pertinent information about the almost billion dollar tax-base increase and its fiscal benefits from the taxpayers and the community?) and finally, be it resolved that the Board of Education calls upon LACOE to conduct a full and complete study and analysis of the proposed transfer under the California Environmental Quality Act at its expense and provide the results of that study to the Board of Education in a timely fashion. (Calling for a CEQA is just another bureaucratic tactic for delaying the decision.)

 

            Adopted this twenty-fifth day of October, 2005, by the CCUSD Board of Education in Culver City.