Fix the District or Let it Fail; Measure SOS Means Local Control

Infrastructure failure is a regular occurrence at PVPUSD’s 17 school sites. Gas leaks, flooding, power failure, structural collapse—everywhere, all the time.

I moved here for the schools. Excellent teachers, local control, and family involvement make a district great. Great districts focus on excellence and achievement while shielding students from politicization by unions and the State. Great schools respect and value parents as critical partners in a child’s education. 

During my campaign, when I expressed concerns about the lack of funds to address our facilities crisis, I was told the district had more money than it knew what to do with (via campaign rhetoric and from then superintendent Cherniss)—a  sentiment echoed by our unions during Spring 2023 negotiations, when every dollar was squeezed from the budget for salaries and benefits. (See here, here and here). If we don’t understand and recognize this pattern, it will continue to repeat itself in future negotiations, wherein (1) the union pretends the district is flush with cash, (2) incumbents who want to be re-elected boast about having a surplus without addressing the underlying shortfalls and absence of capital projects funds in the budget, and (3) instead of going to facilities, every new incoming dollar goes to increased salaries and benefits. Fixing the LCFF funding formula is one way to address the disparity between teacher salaries and benefits in PV versus surrounding areas. Letting our facilities fail without budgeting for their improvement so we can keep increasing salaries and benefits is not a sustainable solution. People need to understand the union playbook and recognize rhetoric for what it is.

Now we don’t have money to fix our buildings, and our infrastructure is failing.

Palos Verdes is in a uniquely bad financial situation. We are on the lowest end of the LCFF funding formula, a system imposed by the State following Serrano v. Priest, where the court determined it was inequitable for districts to use locally-generated tax dollars to fund their schools. “Low income” districts couldn’t afford to pay for teachers and facilities the same way “high income” districts could. Now, the State redistributes our locally generated tax dollars to districts the State deems more deserving of our money.

With LCFF, we do not receive enough money from the State to meet basic safety standards, despite our residents paying substantially higher taxes than other areas.

I asked our State representatives to allow us to retain more locally-generated tax dollars to provide basic safety for our students. They said “that’s the State’s money,” and the State won’t “bail out” Palos Verdes—"you have to pass a bond.” (See here, here, here and here for more on this).

I spent years exploring bond alternatives, including an endowment, private sponsorship, legislative changes to LCFF and statewide facilities funding, among others. There is no viable alternative to a local bond at this time given the state of our facilities and political climate. We must sue the State, but that will take years and victory is not guaranteed. By the time litigation is over, sites will be condemned and abandoned.

We can sell and lease property, but surplus property laws and deed restrictions make this very complicated. The State made workforce housing a by-right use on school district land. Accordingly, if we cannot pass a bond, I expect a push to build housing on our sites. I fear State-appointed receivership and loss of local control.

There are many valid criticisms of the district and the board. The problems are politics and incompetence, not students or teachers. Losing local control of our district will only exacerbate the suffering of our teachers and students, worsen the politicization, and tank property values.

I was not elected to let our district fail. I was elected to make it better.

Measure SOS is the least bad of bad options. For this reason, I incorporated accountability provisions that were missing from previous failed bonds. I fought to lower the rate to $29 per $100,000 of assessed value. SOS funds stay local and cannot be siphoned by the State. SOS funds cannot be used for housing or administrative offices.

If you care about the future of our nation, what kids are learning and what they will do to this country when they come of age, I implore you to get involved and fight to retain local control of our district. Please come to our meetings, vote for candidates who demonstrate fiscal and legal competence and value excellence and family involvement, and add your voice to the chorus of politicized union interests fighting in the opposite direction.

The neglect of facilities for the most vulnerable population in the State is a policy choice by the supermajority party in power. Things will never change unless we vote differently and hold people accountable. California wastes billions of dollars while starving Palos Verdes of resources. (PS: we likely won’t see a dime from Prop 2 due to the wealth-based sliding scale and unreliability of the State.) 

We have two choices: Save the district, or light a match and watch it burn. Saving requires electing new leaders and maintaining local control through Measure SOS.

*This newsletter was published as an Op-Ed in the Daily Breeze on October 16, 2024.