Dear Editor,

I am writing in response to the many, many inaccuracies in the opinion piece written by Nikki Kolhoff.

The School District takes the public trust of bond dollars very seriously. State law requires every school district with a Prop 39 bond measure to create a Citizens’ Bond Oversight Committee, a group of citizens that reviews summary project expenditures and annual audits to make sure that Bond dollars are spent as promised.

Two mandatory third-party audits (a performance audit and a financial audit) are performed by an outside independent audit firm that reports its findings back to both the Bond Oversight Committee, as well as to the Board of Education.

The intent of those audits is to determine whether or not the District has appropriately utilized bond funding for capital improvement projects. Obviously, an auditor or a CPA would not be appropriate to determine whether a project itself is in the best educational interest of our students, or the best use of bond funds.

The school bonds takes the public trust of bonds so seriously that it has refinanced multiple bond series in order to save taxpayers over $50 million. In addition to the Citizens’ Oversight Committee, there is a Facilities Subcommittee of the Board that watches how the money is spent on the construction projects and a Brown-Act Facilities Advisory Committee that keeps tabs on the expenditures, as well as advises staff regarding project priorities.

None of these entities has EVER found any misuse of funds or found that the School District has spent any bond money in any way different than what was intended. All the findings are public and available on the school district website. https://www.smmusd.org/Page/3900

The school district is ready to start construction almost immediately on several important projects. In order to reduce project costs, the District has already designed projects that will start in 2025 at Grant Elementary School, Roosevelt Elementary School, John Adams Middle School, and Lincoln Middle School.

The “blank check” argument is laughable for anyone who has reviewed any documentation regarding the bond program. These projects have been developed with school site and community input, recommended by the Facilities Advisory Committee, and approved by the School Board.

Ms. Kolhoff’s real concern isn’t whether there is an additional audit on the bond program. She simply doesn’t like the projects that the District has undertaken to help improve educational outcomes for the children of Santa Monica.

She often claims that there is no opportunity for the public to provide genuine input into the proposed projects, but she knows this is untrue because she has personally participated in many community meetings during the planning phases of SMMUSD projects. But when she didn’t get her way, she claims that there was no opportunity for input. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Each elementary and middle school campus has gone through an extensive assessment and master planning process, which has involved input from teachers and site administration, as well as students, the PTA, and yes -- the community.

Ms. Kolhoff has attended several of these community meetings and has participated, along with many of our neighbors. These meetings have led to adjustments to the proposed plans and have guided the design teams as they have developed the projects.

I doubt there are many school districts anywhere that have as much public input, oversight and citizen’s review as SMMUSD, making sure that their projects are completed as the voters expected.

When you review the FACTS, you will vote Yes on QS.

Michael Dubin, Chair SMMUSD Bond Oversight Committee