|
|
Nuts and Bolts of Gift Policy Worry Art Advocates By Juliet McShannon Jan. 22 -- A proposed School District gift policy will make it difficult to earmark funds for specific projects, redistribute in-kind gifts and police schools that try to skirt the controversial policy, members of the district’s Advisory Committee on the Fine Arts warned during a meeting Tuesday night. In a candid exchange with Superintendent John Deasy -- who authored the policy -- committee members shifted the focus from a philosophical debate over fairness to the nuts and bolts of implementing a policy that places fifteen percent of donations to individual schools in an “equity” pot to be distributed to those schools in need. The overriding concern for the program directors, teachers and parents from a cross-section of schools who make up the committee seemed to be the lack of incentive for parent's to fundraise for a particular school's project, when they had no way of controlling where the money would go. "The problem with this policy is that it kills anyone's desire to fundraise," said Jean Sedillos, a member of the committee, which includes representatives from John Adams Middle School, SAMOHI and Malibu High. "When the pie is divvied up, there is no guarantee that any money will come back to a specific department, just to the school." Her sentiment was echoed by Christopher Born, a parent from SAMOHI, where there are worries that fundraising efforts, which have resulted in about $100,000 raised for the school's marching band, would be thwarted by the proposed equity fund. "Music and art programs are usually the first to be put on the chopping block when there are cutbacks,” Born said. “We have been lucky enough for parents at SAMOHI to step up to the plate and give generously for the choir, band and orchestra -- for a cause they believe in. Now with this policy they will think twice." Deasy admitted that although there was indeed no guarantee that the equity fund benefited specific school departments, there was also no prohibition outlined in the proposal. He assured the committee that most schools, especially those in the less affluent areas in Santa Monica, would benefit from the 15 percent redistribution, including SAMHOHI. "The money will ultimately come back to the SAMOHI band, and there will be money for other projects as well," Deasy said. However, Deasy was at pains to point out that receiving schools be sensitive to the fact that the more affluent schools, especially those located in Malibu, would not benefit from the equity fund. "There is huge geographic disparity,” Deasy said. “We can't get around that. Malibu High School raised $800,000 for the school. There is obvious inequality if we compare this school with SAMOHI. Therefore SAMOHI will receive from the fund." Deasy was also asked to clear up the confusion over the difference between cash donations and in-kind gifts, which many members felt was not spelt out clearly enough in the policy proposal document. The donation of a drum set to a school, for example, would be exempt, Deasy explained. But large scale landscaping or the donation of a fully equipped computer laboratory would not. "Let's face it, a drum set will not tip equality in a community,” Deasy said, “but the building of a Planetarium, which no school in the district has as yet, would." Committee members were also concerned that parents would have to double their fundraising efforts to compensate for the 15 percent that would be skimmed off the top. "Is this policy ultimately worth it?" asked JAMS and SAMOHI parent Cheryl Downey, who anticipates it will take a huge effort by art lobbyists to make sure that enough of the equity fund would find it's way into funding art programs. "I foresee the time-wise problem of teachers, parents and the administration -- lots and lots of committee work," she said. Policing the proposed policy could also be difficult, committee members warned. Tom Whaley, the coordinator of the K-12 Fine Arts Program, wondered if some school heads wouldn’t find a way of failing to disclose the amount raised in order to escape the equity pot. Deasy said he would not set up punitive measures. "You can't create a policy that polices and altruistic idea,” he told the committee. “We are dealing with adults here after all. We don't want this to become the IRS." Not all committee members were skeptical of the proposed policy. Cyndi Mladinov, a parent at McKinley Elementary School, noted that Point Dume Elementary was able to use $21,000 from its $449,000 fundraising pot to help hire a science teacher, while McKinley’s $80,228 pot wasn't enough to employ an extra teacher. "I moved back to Santa Monica because of the sense of community here," Mladinov said. "If you are in this room, then your kids will be fine. They have a voice. Think of all the parents out there, some who don't even speak English, who do not. We need to get into the spirit of this policy." Deasy defended his policy. "Education in California is woefully under-funded," he said. "This policy is not dictating how people give their money but how the district will receive it." The gift policy will continue to be debated at various upcoming school board meetings with no action taken until April, at the earliest, Deasy said. "No policy is quick because they are usually substantial
in their effects," he concluded. |
![]() |
Copyright 1999-2008 surfsantamonica.com. All Rights Reserved. |