Thursday, April 8, 2010

CV News Letters to the Editor

Source: Carmel Valley News

Children will be impacted the most by the school district’s mess

Dear Del Mar Union School District board members,

I was at the Del Mar Union School District board meeting March 31, but decided not to speak. There were so many people that shared my feelings I figured I would let them speak for me. Now I regret not speaking because there is so much I have to say.

First of all, I would like to put it simply to the board members: garbage rolls down hill. You – yes, you and your personal vendettas, political ambitions, and inability to work effectively as a team are up there at the top. You have made a decision and just sent the garbage rolling downhill to:

  • The Teachers
  • The PTA’s
  • The Foundation
  • The Parents
  • The Principals

And, most importantly, to our children! Our children are the ones who will be impacted the most by this mess that you have created. And that is so sad and so unfair to them.

I can only hope that now that you have decided to let Dr. McClain go, you will put every effort into moving on and seriously improving our district. The morale out there is so bad, you have a lot of work to do. Good luck with that.

Michele Lesher
Carmel Del Mar Parent and PTA Board Member


DM school board creates problems rather than solve them

The Del Mar Union School District had the opportunity last week to right a wrong, and sadly they continued on their path deferring to “not enough information” and “premature decision making.” Could one of the trustees please tell me why, 10 months later, you still do not have the facts to make a decision? This board has spent valuable employee time and community time on a vicious circle to nowhere. A wild goose chase (aka 7-11 Committee) now deferred to “wait and see what the strategic budget task force” can come up with. Having been at a majority of these meetings, I was beginning to think this board was incapable of making one solid decision. However, now that I look at it, perhaps they are even more crafty and their long-term strategy has been continued deferment until even us die-hard attendees get tired of coming and there are no voices left to stand up against them.

What is even more frightening is that this board should have been expediting a budget process, but instead they have created an even bigger one. By tearing apart our community over possible school closures and co-location, they have turned neighbor against neighbor, child against child, they have created such uncertainty and animosity that our ESC programs are crippled, teachers will be laid-off, and our class sizes will be increased.

Those at the highest level of employment are afraid to speak out lest their jobs go the way of our former superintendent or beloved principals. Or, they put themselves at risk for an embarrassing public flogging to determine if the contracts had enough dotted “I”s and crossed “Ts.”

This board was elected as community representatives, to encapsulate the community voice, and enact what is for the greater good of the whole. Yet, so far all I have seen is four ineffective leaders trying to be corralled by one brave soul encouraging the board to take action and move forward. It is like trying to round up a group of schoolmates who would rather focus on petty grievances or old grudges, when they should be standing up as leaders and saying, “I take responsibility for our failures and suggest that we [fill in the blank with something that looks like progress].

Unfortunately, it is too late to recall this group and we are now forced to continue to watch this pathetic excuse for leadership take its course. However, I urge all of our community to be aware, for the 20 of us who stuck our heads out of the hole at the Feb. 24 meeting have seen our shadows and it looks like nine more months of upheaval.

Heidi Niehart

P.S. The board still has a chance to leave a legacy of progress if they would listen to the realtors and the attorneys and buy a building while it is buyer-friendly.


The board’s vision of the DMUSD community is flawed

By Suzanne Hall
Parent, Torrey Hills Elementary School

After rejecting Superintendent Sharon McClain’s design for the composition of the Financial Planning Task Force (FTF) in favor of emphasizing community input, the DMUSD board created an unbalanced FTF that poorly represents the DMUSD community as a whole. This inequitable composition threatens the validity of any recommendations made by this task force.

The FTF is, in part, comprised of 13 parents. Logic would dictate that these 13 parents be spread as equitably as possible across the eight DMUSD schools, with no school receiving more than two parent representatives. However, two of the smallest schools in the district — Del Mar Hills and Ashley Falls — each have three parent representatives.

Conversely, the three largest schools in the district — Torrey Hills, Ocean Air and Sage Canyon — have between them a sum total of four representatives.

As a result, four FTF members represent 51 percent of the student population while 19.6 percent of the students have six representatives. Does this seem fair to the board? To parents of underrepresented schools, it falls far short of equity.

In addition, the board itself chose to appoint to the FTF two of the Del Mar Hills parents and two of the Ashley Falls parents. This, beyond the mandated appointment of a representative by the PTA at each school. The board knew that each of these schools already had one representative, and they chose to seat two more. Thus, the board is directly responsible for the inequity in the composition of the FTF.

Does the board truly believe that the voices of the parents of the other district schools matters less than that of parents at these smaller schools?

This board faces a number of challenging issues, including an increasingly divided community of parents. The composition of the FTF does little to improve the latter, and a concern is that it may do little to improve the budget crisis. The other members of the task force, staff and volunteers representing various aspects of the district, will be met with a skewed perspective on what the parents of the DMUSD want to see in dealing with the district budget crunch. How can these parents represent the well-being of the district as a whole when so many of them represent only one point of view?

The board has made a grave error. There is so very little time before they must make significant decisions for the potential benefit of the district, and yet they have set themselves up for failure by not developing an FTF of the composition they so strongly professed they wanted. This FTF does not represent the community of DMUSD. It represents only a small proportion of the community. And the message sent by the board is: it is the only part of the community that matters to them.

In response, I would remind the board: the larger community will be voting, come November.


Superintendent’s actions cause for concern

I am a fairly new parent to the Del Mar school district, but I have been watching what has been going on during that time. One of the issues raised at the recent school board meeting has caused me enough concern that I am writing to you.

At this last school board meeting, I was watching a parent accuse trustee White of using the DMUSD legal services for her private use. How did this parent get information on district legal bills? I understand this parent made a request to the district for bills, but I have enough experience in my business life to know legal bills are always provided redacted, so that attorney-client privileged information is protected. In all the bills I have seen, the text describing the service is whited out. I am not necessarily concerned with the ignorance of this parent although her behavior was disrespectful and poor role modeling for the children in the audience. I am concerned that a superintendent would potentially put our district at risk for divulging attorney-client information to the public through these legal bills and documents.

I understood when Ms. White explained that her role as board president last year made her point person for legal issues and I understood this role now falls to Ms. Rodriguez. I saw the board explain this and concur this is how they work. But I don’t understand how a superintendent who was involved in an employee complaint which required the district to hire an attorney for this complaint should ethically be looking at these bills and how legally she can provide confidential information to someone. This is wrong.

Ms McClain, when hired for this district, was hired because she claimed to be a team player and a community builder, something this district really needed. Since her arrival, she has been divisive and has pitted school against school. I am now convinced, especially after this very concerning action, that she should be let go. She is damaging this district.

Hanna Morgan


DMUSD school board tries to terminate second superintendent

By Kate Takahashi, DMUSD parent

How would you feel if your child forfeited his birthday presents to make a school donation only to find that three grown adults snatched it from her and threw it in the Pacific Ocean? If the three-person majority of Del Mar Union School Board succeeds in their agenda of firing Superintendent Sharon McClain, they would do just that, but on a much larger scale. Please read on.

The economic reality

During these tough economic times, we DMUSD parents are scrambling to save the cherished ESC programs that our district can’t afford. Honestly, it’s exhausting, but we do it for our children. And the children themselves are working hard to keep their teachers. I have stories of Girl Scout Troops donating, pancake breakfasts, garage sales... We’re all doing our best to scrape together every penny we can.

The economic crisis is not just affecting ESC. DMUSD’s reserves are millions of dollars below the recommended level for a Basic Aid district. If our reserves dip below 3 percent of expenditures, the state could be required to balance our budget in any way it sees fit — larger classroom sizes, teacher lay-offs – without community input.

The board’s actions

And what is our school board doing about the budget? They are calling their attorneys – daily at times – at the rate of $160/hour. From July through December of 2009, they racked up $21,339 in legal fees. What could be so important? The school board is searching for ways to fire Dr. Sharon McClain, the supremely qualified leader they chose in September 2008 to replace Tom Bishop, the last guy they fired that same year.

Disaster either way

If the board fires Dr. McClain for cause, she could sue for the length of her contract, plus benefits, plus attorneys’ fees. That could amount to as much as half a million dollars. If they buy out her contract for one year, that could approximate a quarter million dollars. Either way, that money comes from the district coffers to educate your child.

Incidentally, this board, in pursuing this wasteful litigation, is choosing to triple-pay a superintendent’s salary. Remember Tom Bishop? He’s Superintendent 1, and we are still paying his buyout. If they fire Dr. McClain – or Superintendent 2 – then the district would pay her while paying an interim superintendent, or Superintendent 3 (if they could find anyone willing to work here). So DMUSD would be paying Baby Superintendent, Mama Superintendent, and Papa Superintendent all at the same time, for a grand total that could approach a million dollars. Now I’m asking, Are you outraged yet?

Did I mention Dr. McClain doesn’t deserve this?

At the hard-to-believe age of 65, she is at the top of her professional game, having won Pepperdine University’s Superintendent of the Year Award, and having taught school governance at seven different universities. She has worked with and for children her whole life, having been an elementary teacher, university instructor, principal, assistant superintendent, superintendent (three times), mother, and foster mother. At this stage of her life, she has chosen her most challenging job yet as superintendent of DMUSD, and she has thus far guided us through this financial crisis with optimism and smart ideas.

And, gratefully, she’s still here. Let’s be there for her.

What we can do:

  1. Talk: Tell people what you have learned about this board. If you are unsure about any facts or figures in this editorial, ask DMUSD about what public records you have a right to see, including their attorney bills. Research past articles from local papers.
  2. Make it a daily task to log on to dmusd.org in order to know if a board meeting is taking place. If it is, go to “view agenda.” Be on the lookout for “Public Employee Discipline/Dismissal/Release.” If that is there, there could be a closed meeting to terminate Dr. McClain. The board must hear public input before they go into closed session. Fill out a speaker slip, wait for your name to be called, and you will have three minutes to tell the board how you feel. If you are uncomfortable speaking, write a letter to the board and have a friend read it and/or send a letter to the board.
  3. Vote: Cast your ballot this November. Tell your friends to vote, as well.

Solution to the problem is obvious

Sometimes there is an obvious solution to the problem. Del Mar Union School District Superintendent Sharon McClain came with previously used and not the best idea of changing school boundaries again to fill low enrollment schools. Superintendent Bishop tried just that. He wanted to force parents of children living next to Torrey Hills and Sage Canyon schools to drive their children to and from Del Mar Heights and Hills schools every school day. Those parents were paying Mello-Roos tax to be able to send their children to neighborhood schools. It took a lot of time and energy to convince him to instead let Sage Canyon accept more children. Do you want to repeat the past?

Why would anyone even suggest adding offices to Torrey Hills school knowing that there is a plan to built a condominium complex just across from this school and the enrollment will increase again.

From Google maps, one can see that the distance between Del Mar Hills and Del Mar Heights schools is 0.8 mile, it takes 3 minutes by car, or 14 minutes by walking. Are there any other schools in the district so close to each other? You have a half empty school, space for additional kids in nearby schools, you need space for the office, what do you do?

Grazyna Krajewska
Torrey Hills


Leave district boundaries intact, don’t hire vice principals

I wanted to comment on Del Mar Union School District Superintendent Sharon McClain's comment in the Jan. 29 article titled “DM superintendent recommends district buy property for headquarters” which stated "McClain mentioned making boundary changes east of Interstate 5 as a possible cost-saving option. As Sage Canyon and Ocean Air each have around 700 students and Torrey Hills nears that size, the schools will need vice principals. She said the district could save $850,000 by reducing the enrollment size of the three schools through boundary changes (students would be moved to other schools in the district). The enrollment changes would eliminate the need for the three vice principal positions. The re-boundary could also help boost enrollment numbers at Ashley Falls.”

Homes in the boundaries of these three schools are south of the 56 freeway, many have been paying a special Mello Roos tax for a "neighborhood school" for years, and all are several miles away from Ashley Falls (and require crossing a major freeway), making that far from being a "neighborhood school." Before any consideration is given to changing boundaries for these three schools, I sure hope they will eliminate the policy that has grandfathered in many kids outside of these school boundaries.

I used to watch every morning the many dozens of cars from north of the 56 that would cross the freeway bringing their kids over to our area schools. Does it make any sense to have kids driven from homes north of the 56 to school south of the 56, and drive kids from homes south of the 56 to school north of the 56? It wastes fuel, and it breaks up the integrity of having kids who live near one another go to school together, which would facilitate friendships and neighborhood cohesiveness. Another suggestion would be to leave the census and boundaries as is and just not hire the vice principals, if their cost is the issue. I wanted to bring this suggestion to light to the community before it gets much traction.

Kathy Rowe


School bored, school daze, school wars

By Gordon Clanton

School board politics is the most local politics of all. This may explain the intensity, nay, the rancor that often characterizes school board meetings and school board elections. Until recently, the Del Mar Union School District was spared such struggles. But no more.

In 2006, dissident board member Annette Easton recruited Katherine White and Steven McDowell to help her take over the board. The new majority fired the superintendent. Now the board is feuding with the new superintendent they hired.

Full disclosure: I opposed the insurgent slate in 2006, supporting Barbara Myers and Martha Murphy. I was not persuaded that the incumbent board should be turned out, and I found the strident and expensive insurgent campaign off-putting.

I re-joined the fray when I learned that the board was considering closing the Del Mar Hills Academy. I live three blocks from the Hills school. Although I have no children, I consider the school an important part of my community.

My neighbors with children in the Hills school are upset to learn the school may close. They like the fact that their kids can now walk to school without crossing Del Mar Heights Road. They are alarmed that some parents in the district support closing the Hills school as a likely way of preserving their own neighborhood schools.

By the way, I’m suspicious of estimates that purport to show ever-decreasing enrollments for the Hills school and Del Mar Heights school. What’s happening in my neighborhood is that elderly residents are dying, and young couples with school-age children are purchasing their houses.

So, having sold the Shores school site, the school district needs to find a new home for its administrative offices, thus stirring fears of school closings.

Meanwhile, the Del Mar campaign to pay for the Shores property has come up short, with more than $3.5 million owed.

Nobody asked me but: If the school district were to buy back or lease back the portion of the Shores site it currently occupies, then it would have no need to find a new location. Simultaneously, the debt owed by the city of Del Mar would be substantially reduced. The district could gain flexibility by moving more administrative functions to available space at schools that are under-enrolled.

I hope the board will find a way to keep all the schools open, thus reducing the prevailing anxiety and distrust.

The neighborhood school is part of a social fabric that ought not be casually rent asunder.

Gordon Clanton teaches sociology at San Diego State University. He welcomes comments at gclanton@mail.sdsu.edu.


Killing two birds with one stone: Resolving multiple issues within the DMUSD

Now that the 7/11 committee has issued its final report, the DMUSD Board of Trustees is tasked with resolving the movement of the district offices. In addition, it has directed that a financial task force begin working on options for cutting expenses within the district. It is imperative that the board considers the financial health of the DMUSD as it makes its determination as to where to place the district offices and maintenance operations.

Superintendent McClain has made a recommendation that the board use the money from the sale of the Shores property to purchase a site for the district offices. The superintendent stated that a decision needs to be made expeditiously. Dragging this process out can cost the district money, as property values of lots for sale will eventually escalate, and interim leasing of a temporary space would bleed badly needed funds from the DMUSD budget. The board is urged to make a decision soon.

One of the superintendent's alternate recommendations is to house the district offices on a school site. This is a bad idea, unless that school site was designated solely for the purpose of district offices and maintenance operations. District offices should be housed separately from students. Joint use endangers children and degrades the atmosphere of the school, which in turn reduces the quality of the educational experience for the children at that site. Further, joint use options at school sites provide no significant cost savings to the district. Resolving the move of district offices without an eye to the financial crisis the DMUSD is experiencing is imprudent.

Closure of a school would allow for the offices to be unified at one site, while providing cost savings needed by the district. The 7/11 committee determined that the DMUSD would save at least $450,000 annually if a school were closed. This could protect the job of one teacher at each of the remaining school sites, year after year.

Closing a school does not completely cover the projected gap in the DMUSD budget for the next two years. However, in combination with other proposed money saving options, such as installing solar panels, school closure can provide more than an estimated $1,000,000 per annum. How many teachers' jobs could be saved with that figure? It is too significant to be ignored.

In summary, the board is urged to keep the district's financial situation in the forefront of their minds during deliberations regarding the move of district offices. It is a certainty that the DMUSD will need to be making cuts to the budget in the near term to make ends meet. Let's hope the board of trustees does not exacerbate the need for cuts by disregarding cost savings measures available to them in making this decision.

Suzanne Hall
Torrey Hills mom


Del Mar school board has taken district in a new direction — south

Given the realization of the mess their micro-management has created in the last three years, the majority slate of three orchestrated the election of first-year board member Comischell Rodriguez as president of the board at the organizational meeting on Wednesday, Dec. 9, 2009.

While there was understandable elation in the audience at President Rodriguez’s election, the community needs to be reminded that she continues to remain only one vote out of five on the school board. If President Rodriguez is able to restore protocol and time-efficiency to the conduct of public meetings, that alone would be a significant contribution to the community.

Meetings have become nitpicking marathons of minutiae and seemingly endless time-wasting discussion, with the audience wandering and chatting and eating throughout the entire proceedings. The retreating board members vowed sincerely to support President Rodriguez throughout what will soon become a very challenging year for her. And, we can hold them to their word, can’t we? After all, when the majority slate of three fired the superintendent in February 2008, they indicated that they wanted to take the district in a new direction. Well, they surely did. We just didn’t know that direction was south.

Martha Cox