Task Force to School Board: New Mindset Needed for Change

By Teresa Rochester

Likening the school district to a $100 million a year business in need of a new way of thinking, the Superintendent's Financial Task Force presented to the Board of Education on Wednesday night the fruits of its inquiry into district financial practices.

Calling the nine-month inquiry -- which took several months longer than expected -- a deeply emotional time, the four-member task force outlined reasons for the district's financial woes, proposed potential solutions and predicted it will cost the district $3 million to $5 million to implement changes.

"It will require a different mindset," Task Force member Neil Carrey told the board. "There are some really important issues we have to address."

The report, authored by Carrey, Wendy Cary, Jean Gebeman and Anita Landecker, focuses on the district's expenditures, revenues and administrative processes and analyzes how the district might spend its resources more wisely.

Task Force members, who began their work shortly before last year's budget shortfalls, identified several problems, including inadequate staffing in the district's finance department, an inadequate reserve, the participation of board members in labor negotiations without a third party and inefficient systems that cannot track costs and benefits.

The report makes four key recommendations to improve the financial workings in the district. The recommendations include: Structuring and managing the district in a more business-like manner, improving district credibility, strengthening relationships between the cities of Santa Monica and Malibu and developing additional sources of revenue.

The Task Force recommended specific steps such as creating a user-friendly budget to help address credibility problems, restructure the delivery of special education services and hire a full-time fundraiser to build corporate partnerships to address the problems that face the district.

Board members were urged to lobby the cities of Santa Monica and Malibu for the money necessary to hire an outside consultant to thoroughly review and recommend improvements for fiscal managerial practices and to help fatten the district's current bare-minimum reserve.

"You can't go to the cities the way you have gone in the past, with your heads downcast, hats in hand, on your knees in a crisis," said Task Force member Wendy Cary. "You need to be proactive."

Most board members agreed that lobbying was necessary.

"We should advocate to the city," said board member Pam Brady. "We need to act on that now or other interests in the city will help them spend their reserve."

"I think we need to seize the moment," board member Dorothy Chapman said. "There are good explicit recommendations. We certainly have nothing to lose asking both cities to help us. We're acting decisively on good recommendations and we're seeking to fix our relations with the cities by showing we are willing to take some preventive measures and not showing up on their doorsteps in crisis."

Board members said they also were concerned with treating the school district as a business, funding the recommendations and implementing them.

"I struggle with this business issue," said board member Julia Brownely. "We're a school district not a Fortune 500. I do agree with trying to be as efficient as we can be."

"Students are not widgets," board member Brenda Gottfried said.

Task Force members agreed but said that in order to move forward, the thinking within the district would have to change.

Board President Todd Hess questioned how the district would pay for the recommendations, which would cost the district between $3 million to $5 million and include various outside and internal specialists, without cutting any programs.

"You are suggesting very strongly that we prioritize and spend substantially on management and administration," said Hess. "If that's true, what programs are you suggesting we cut?"

Gebeman said he wouldn't cut any programs. Instead he suggested the board make it a priority to hire a full-time fundraiser.

"I would vest in that person a very broad responsibility, making that person an assistant superintendent of development," said Gebeman. "I would ask the cities to pay for the position for three years. If that person has not raised revenue significantly, then dismiss that person."

Supt. Neil Schmidt said district staff will review the Task Force recommendations and discuss them with board members, who will have to reach consensus on which recommendations will become priorities.

Parents urged the board to follow through on the recommendations. Parent Debbie Mullvaney, a former vice president of an international bank, who has a child at Roosevelt Elementary School, related the school PTA's frustrations in trying to get financial records from the district.

"I think it's a shame that a $100 million corporation operates that way," said Mullvaney. "We need to have sound financial practices."

Parent John Petz called the report a stinging review of the board's leadership and told board members that if they were unwilling to adopt changes they should be willing to step down from their positions.

"Do you have what it takes to lead this district?" Petz asked the board. "Do you believe in what the task force is brining to you and will you act on it? If you don't, you might want to consider retiring. This is not about politics... If you are not ready to change, please, please step down."

Acknowledging that the board may be charged with being top-heavy and spending too much outside of the classroom, board members unanimously agreed to create a new assistant superintendent position.

The new assistant superintendent will be in charge of overseeing the delivery of student services, including special education. The position was born out of a yearlong analysis of the district's special education program, which has been the target of harsh criticism from parents and teachers alike.

Funding for the new position will come from a currently unfilled administrative position and would be supplemented with an additional $25,000 to $30,000 during the first year. The position will be evaluated after three years to gauge its effectiveness. The filing period for applications will begin on June 19 and run through July 21.