Save Our Schools Saves Nearly 20 Teachers & Staff!

CAMPAIGN VOLUNTEERS COMMENDED BY BOARD OF EDUCATION

The Santa Monica Malibu Board of Education commended The Save Our Schools campaign and the Santa Monica Malibu Education Foundation at Wednesday night’s School Board meeting, citing visionary fundraising that will n affect students throughout district schools for the 2010 – 2011 school year.

The SOS campaign raised $1,517,201.68 in only 60 days. At the same meeting, the Board of Education restored 19.75 positions with SOS proceeds. 9.5 elementary teacher positions will be restored with Save Our Schools funds. In addition, 2 secondary teachers, 1.75 counselors, 2.5 music teachers, and 4 library coordinators will keep their jobs as a result of Save Our Schools funding. The Board also approved additional positions to be restored with expected Federal Education Jobs Fund dollars.

The result of the positions restored by the Board of Education at the meeting, combining funding from both Save our Schools and the Federal Jobs Fund, will be class sizes in Kindergarten lowered from 27:1 to 23:1, class sizes in grades 1-3 lowered from 27:1 to 25:1, class size ratios lowered in middle and high schools, significantly lower counselor ratios, elementary libraries will remain fully open, the elementary music program will be completely restored, and funding has been allocated for reading specialists and professional development.

“Thanks to the outstanding work of our SOS volunteers, along with an unexpected boost from the federal government, we have made significant progress in bringing almost everything back — for this year,” said Linda Greenberg Gross, Executive Director of the Santa Monica-Malibu Education Foundation.

“Within hours of Measure A not being passing, the Santa Monica-Malibu Education Foundation Executive Director Gross and a small army of volunteers came together with a plan,” said Superintendent Tim Cuneo.
You’ve made our day, helped all of our students and saved our schools for next year.”

“The community support from Save Our Schools is an inspiration. It helps me continue doing what I love with the knowledge that I am not alone in my efforts to afford our children a chance at a better future. Instead, I am part of a family that embodies the true definition of community,” said Monica Micale, a pinkslipped teacher at Franklin Elementary School.

“I am so grateful to everyone who worked on Save Our Schools and who contributed to this worthwhile fund,” says Malibu High School principal, Dr. Mark Kelly. “This funding will have an impact on kids at our school and throughout the entire district.”

“As an SMMUSD educator, a district parent and an SOS contributor, it is inspiring to see our community reach into its own pocket to donate $1.5M toward restoring funding for our schools cut by the State,” said Carl Hobkirk, Assistant Principal at Lincoln Middle School.  “The immediate results are the restoration of numerous vital programs that will begin benefiting our children on September 7th and throughout the coming school year.”
##############
For more information, please go to www.smmef.org.

2 thoughts on “Save Our Schools Saves Nearly 20 Teachers & Staff!”

  1. Regarding the two Santa Monica ballots pertaining to the increase of taxes … I am in opposition to the tax ballot measures being presented to the electorate.    Deception is not a City Council’s right.   It is the responsibility to be honest and forthright about the reason you want to raise taxes.   
    When the Santa Monica Malibu School Board tried to pass a parcel tax this year this demonstrated the beginning of a deception to the home owners, of the Santa Monica Unified School District that was second to none.   Having a mail-in ballot was a ruthless method to attempt to raise parcel taxes.    The attempt to use this technique of mail-in only was an attempt to circumvent a broader turnout at a major election.    This was deception.    The Board Members knew that most of the mail-in ballots would be tossed as junk mail by most residents that have little to do with the district except to participate in an unfair parcel tax. 
    This parcel tax stated … regardless of the size of your parcel you pay the same amount as the hotels.   The board members knew that most of the mail-ins would come from the parents and families of students that attend the schools.   Yes … this was deception at its best.
    The following is a perfect example of why this new tax proposal is another attempt of deception by not just the Santa Monica Malibu School District but in this case … the Santa Monica City Council….
    The following was taken from …
     
    SMMUSD backs Santa Monica city tax proposal
    Published:
    Wednesday, July 21, 2010 12:51 PM PDT
    By Jonathan Friedman / The Malibu Times … a partial text
    Malibu City Councilmember Laura Rosenthal said she would have to study the concept of a Malibu sales tax before deciding if that is a good idea. Rosenthal said she likes the decision by the board to back Santa Monica’s tax proposal, and noted that many Malibu residents shop in Santa Monica.
    Furthermore … Councilmember Rosenthal said … “Whatever we can do to raise money for the schools is really great,” she said. “This is an interesting and creative way to raise money for the schools.”
    In reply to the above I would simply say … One ballot measure asks for the tax and the second ballot measure advises that 50% of the taxes raised by the additional tax increase be given to the district.   That is like a boxer giving a left to the stomach followed by a right cross knockout blow to the jaw of the electorate.
    Santa Monica City Council members … you should be embarrassed by this SHAM.     Councilman Shriver, while you stated … you were in opposition to the tax proposals you still approved of their placement on the ballot.   I hope you truly campaign against these two ballot measures. 
    Now that the Federal Government has passed legislation to  protect our teacher’s jobs then cities don’t need to pass their money onto their school district whose boundaries may or may not be the same as the cities boundaries.
    *************************gaptidbits@yahoo.com************************
    The following are statements as to why I am in opposition to the measures.
    Tax Initiative… Opposition
    Whereas the City Council
    1.       Whereas the City Council did not project a deficit or a lack of reserves.
    2.       Whereas the City Council speculated instead of projected that the state will withhold money in the future.
    3.       Whereas the City Council stated that the state has been deficient and is currently in a financial crisis without stating the effect upon our city.
    4.       Whereas the City Council will be given the right to amend this initiative if passed and retain this tax for an indefinite time period.
    5.       Whereas the City Council has not stated which services must be cut.
    6.       Whereas the City Council has an Impartial City Attorney Analysis that states that funds can be used for schools or education which contradicts the actual purpose as stated within the measure  Whereas the City Council has an Impartial City Attorney Analysis that states that funds can be used for schools or education which contradicts the actual purpose as stated within the measure Ordinance No. 2316 (CCS) which is … To provide transactions and use tax revenue to the City to be used for the general governmental purposes of the City and with any transactions and use tax revenue received being placed into the City’s general fund.
     
    Now therefore … Because of the above reasons
    the Voters of the city of Santa Monica must VOTE NO!
     
     
     
     
    Advisory tax initiative … Opposition
     
    I am in opposition for the following reasons …
     
     
    1.       Whereas the initiative asks for half of the money raised to be used by the Santa Monica Malibu Unified School District.   The districts boundary is not the same as the boundary of the City of Santa Monica.
    2.      Whereas there is no stated time limit as to the period of time the tax is to be collected.
    3.      Whereas there is no stated budget from the district to identify income and expenses along with deficits applicable to the district.
    4.      Whereas this advisory contradicts the purpose of the tax money raised in the proposed Ordinance No. 2316 (CCS) … which is to use the tax money to meet the needs of the City of Santa Monica not the School District of the Santa Monica Malibu Unified School District.
    5.      Whereas the Impartial statement by the city attorney contradicts the proposed …  Ordinance No. 2316 (CCS) … tax measure’s use of funds. 
     
     
     
    Now therefore … Because of the above the voting public for the City of Santa Monica must … VOTE NO!
     
    **********************gaptidbits@yahoo.com******************************

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *