|
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Redondo Beach News
by Mark McDermott
The three new members of the Redondo Beach School Board, elected as a reform slate at the March 4 polls, were sworn in at Tuesday night’s board meeting, and then received a long, messy glimpse of things to come.
Teachers from the high school implored that the job of an associate principal be saved, the process for hiring a new superintendent was debated, and a proposal that would create new advisory seats on the board faced both warm support and comprehensive, withering criticism. And, of course, the shadow of the 800-pound gorilla the district faces was ever-present: the board must decide how to best make $1.5 million in budget cuts within its next few meetings. Administration staff provided a list of potential cuts on Tuesday night that included eight jobs and several much-loved programs.
By the end of a sprawling and occasionally brawling meeting that clocked in at over four hours, voluminous discussion had produced little actual action, but instead set the stage for upcoming decisions that will define the district for years to come.
“I would like to say congratulations to you, and good luck,” said Greg Anderson, a longtime district watchdog, at the very outset of the meeting. “I’ll be watching.”
The three new members—Carl Clark, Jane Diehl, and Arlene Staich—together garnered 68 percent of the votes at the March election to win a controlling majority of the five-person board. They were recruited and supported by the Parents and Teachers for a Responsive School Board, a coalition of parents and teacher and classified union employees. Chief among their campaign promises was improvement of communication between the district, its employees, and the community.
If Tuesday night’s meeting was any indication, that promise will be fulfilled. There was no shortage of communication.
The board’s first action was to elect Staich as its new president, and Rebecca Sargent—who served the last year as president and has been a board member for three decades—as vice president.
Even before the meeting reached its agenda, a half-dozen teachers had addressed the board, asking that it intercede and reverse an administrative decision not to renew the contract Fred Gomeztrejo, an associate principal at the high school. He was praised for his availability to both teachers and students, and his willingness to admit mistakes and learn from them. “He made mistakes, and I was all over him, but I have come, over the last year, to respect him as a professional and as a human being,” said teacher Julie Ferron.
“I just need to let you know as skeptical as I am, and as wary of administrators as I am, we need him,” said teacher Jerry Rhodes.
The administration has offered no reason for its decision to let Gomeztrejo go, and is unable, by law, to discuss personnel matters publicly unless he waives his right to privacy. The board took no immediate action on the matter, but new members have indicated the decision will be reviewed.
It is one among many personnel matters the district faces, foremost the hiring of a new superintendent in the wake of Bill Nunan’s resignation two weeks ago. New board members indicated they felt the need to learn more about the district before approaching the decision. Diehl suggested that former Superintendent Beverly Rohrer be contacted to possibly conduct a workshop for the new members, and Sargent agreed that the appointment should not be made hastily. “It the most important personnel decision this board makes, and it should not be done quickly or without a great deal of thought,” Sargent said.
Board member Robin Shaw warned against moving too slowly, noting that a nearby district was without a superintendent eight months. “I think we need to be careful not to postpone this as we wade our way through, so we don’t lose desired candidates,” she said.
The board directed Assistant Superintendent Chris Chavez to bring back information regarding consultants to assist with the search at the next meeting. The mention of consultants drew the ire of Robert Hadley, president of the classified employee unions, who a short time earlier had greeted the “new faces” and noted they had replaced “an atmosphere of despair with hope.”
“I would like to state for the record that this school district needs another consultant like it needs a hole in the head,” Hadley said.
Classified employees face the majority of job cuts tentatively proposed by the administration in a document submitted to the board Tuesday evening. In a list of potential cuts prepared by Chavez and Deputy Superintendent Tom Cox, five classified positions (totaling $215,000) and three administrative positions (totaling $270,000) would be eliminated. No certified personnel would lose jobs, although the high school librarian would be reassigned as an English teacher. “We should be taking care of our own, and we should be looking at what we can do to keep the system together and keep people employed,” Hadley said.
The district, facing dwindling revenues because of the state’s budget crisis, needs to make $1.5 million in cuts to its $55 million budget by July 1 and, in order to meet statutory guidelines, must make any decision to lay off classified employees by early May. The $715,000 in potential cuts aside from layoffs includes an elementary music program ($200,000), ending a kindergarten class size reduction program ($250,000), and reduction in maintenance overtime and substitute utilization ($100,000).
Carl Clark urged that the community attend the April 23 meeting to provide input concerning potential cuts. “I want some input,” he said. “I want some dialogue. And I’m hoping as many people as possible will be at that next meeting to achieve that dialogue.”
Clark received extensive dialogue regarding a proposal he had attached to this week’s agenda that would create three non-voting advisory positions on the board representing the teacher’s union, the classified employees union, and the PTA. District activist Nora Geissert, in particular, presented an exhaustive and highly critical look at the proposal. Among a barrage of problems Geissert said the positions could create are potentially illegal conflicts of interest for its union representatives, as well as violations of the state educational code. Geissert noted that even though she was a former CESA member, she could not support the creation of new adviser roles. “Once you say, ‘adviser,’ you are infringing upon my rights, and I will be looking into it,” she said.
PTA President Anita Averick also voiced disapproval to the proposal. “Thank you for thinking of us and trying to put us up there, but I don’t think this is the time to be doing that,” she said.
Parent Ed Pitzer voiced support for the proposal, saying that teachers and other employees were long overdue the respect sitting on the board dais would confer. He said that when the idea was first suggested he was both elated and appalled. “I was appalled we have been without such advisers for so many years,” he said.
Shaw wondered how the line could be drawn at three groups, and said she thought it would exclude many constituencies and create new divisions in the district, concerns echoed by Sargent. The board moved to table the matter under consideration until the first meeting in May. Clark voiced a willingness to change the proposal, noting in spirit it was simply meant to increase inclusiveness. “Perhaps I framed this incorrectly,” he said.
It was a long, messy meeting, with few conclusions and more than a few disagreements, perhaps resembling a functioning democracy more than a Redondo board meeting had in several years.
[hermosawave.net] [hermosawave internet] [webcam] [picture of the day] [easyreader] [adventures with technology] [internet radio] [wireless internet] [beachbash] [online payment] [email]