By Mark Galanty
As I read about the current debate on the School District’s potential bond measure for capital improvements and repairs, I hear many voices regarding the decision of three School Board members to delay their vote on the bond.
The real issue here is not the bond, but community leadership.
I have not heard anyone debate whether the Culver City schools need repairs. Even the three Board
members who killed the bond for November seem to agree schools are in urgent need of repairs and capital improvements.
The real issue is leadership. Who is really working to steer our schools’ infrastructure toward full health and vitality?
The bond issue is not new. It has been discussed in the community for more than 17 months. It has been before the Board members for at least seven months. When it came time for an up-or-down vote at the last meeting to qualify it for the November ballot, three members (Karlo Silbiger, Patricia Siever and Nancy Goldberg) punted. Instead, they chose to postpone the matter until at least next year to “study it more.”
One can only wonder what these three Board members have being doing? Why hadn’t they discharged their duties to conduct their due diligence beforehand. They knew the July 1 School Board meeting was the last chance to get this important decision before the voters this year.
I would have had no problem if these Board members had voiced against the bond measure. At least that
would have shown they had done their research, studied the issue, and were making the kind of
decisions leaders are elected to make. So they showed up unprepared, not having formed an opinion. One article said they were kicking the can down the road.
Our school facilities are not a can.
The actions of Mr. Silbiger, Ms. Siever and Ms. Goldberg suggest that their true motives may have been to suppress the bond measure or to kill it.
Is it not disingenuous to proclaim you support the idea of a bond, but then not do what is necessary to present it to the voters?
They have ensured that that our school facilities will continue to deteriorate, ultimately costing the taxpayers more by waiting until the deferred repairs and improvements become critical. The health of our schools has a direct impact on the health of our community and our homes.
What about the students, teachers and administrators who spend their time there? I am sure they would not want to see Board members procrastinate, especially the ones with termites raining in their rooms, or with other serious infrastructure issues.
I applaud Kathy Paspalis and Laura Chardiet. Here are two Board members not afraid to act as the leaders they were elected to be. They visited schools, saw what needed to be done, and explored ways to fund the repairs and improvements in a challenging economic environment. The bond measure is one of those ways. Now it cannot even be considered. Let the community ultimately decide. Do not spend public money to research and then not take a stand.
This brings me back to my point that this is really about is leadership:
Who is willing to do the hard work of leading?
Who is content to sit idly by?
Mr. Galanty may be contacted at mark@galanty.com
