Board of Education Hopes PR Could Help Produce Dollars

• SMMUSD Area Schools Are Facing Three Years of Deficit Funds Due to Statewide Economic Crisis

BY SUZANNE GULDIMANN

With a bleak economic outlook and a $12 million deficit that is anticipated to grow by an additional $12 million annually for the next three years, the Santa Monica Malibu Unified School District Board of Education is discussing hiring a communications director to improve public relations and assist the district in finding funding sources.
The job description that accompanied the Oct. 15 board of education meeting agenda stated “Under the supervision of the superintendent, the director of communications, accountability, and community engagement, plans, develops, coordinates, and implements communication and public relations activities; advises upon and manages effective media, community and public relations; composes and designs press releases for distribution; maintains editorial and graphics standards; and coordinates and produces special public events.”
The salary and benefits for the proposed position would total $107,010: a salary of $85,608 and a benefits package of $21,402. Staff proposed that 60 percent of the salary would be funded “through monies that had been budgeted for the director of school safety position, which will not be filled.” The remaining 40 percent could potentially be funded with Measure BB bond money, according to the staff report.
District supervisor Tim Cuneo suggested that the new position could provide valuable assistance with the parcel tax and bond issue initiatives currently being discussed. He added that the current building and improvement bond, measure BB, committee has also requested assistance.
The proposal met with a mixed reception.
Cynthia Torres, chair of the Financial Oversight Committee, spoke in support of the discussion item. “The [parcel tax] election is likely to happen,” she said. We are in a dire financial position. We need effective public and media relations [to] tell the district’s story effectively [and] make effective use of media.”
Santa Monica school activist Richard MacKinnon disagreed. “The moment that the superintendent told us all we were facing a $12 million hole in funding our schools is the moment I don’t believe we should go ahead with the hires. We were told in the spring there would be a hiring freeze. This is going in a completely wrong direction. The public of our community will take the entirely wrong message away.”
“Would it be bad politically to do this?” asked board member Ben Allen.
Teachers Union representative Harry Keiley seemed to think so. “The reality is you’ve increased class sizes, we’re in a so-called economic crisis and were talking about spending more money, not less, on a position that may be needed in good times? You’re asking employee groups to make considerable concessions and be part of a solution. I’m appalled that this item is here at this time in this climate.
“I don’t buy into the branding of public schools,” Keily continued. “This is not corporate America. This is not the time to be talking about creating a $100,000 position, which is the equivalent of two beginning teachers. How are my teachers going to respond to this? If this is a real crisis out there we need to start acting like it.”
“I’ve always thought a position like this could bring value to the district,” board member Jose Escarce responded. “I wish it would have been proposed a long time ago but I couldn’t defend this [now] because I think we are currently in a position to support programs as much as possible,” “Yes, of course there would be benefit but the short-term effect is negligible. I believe it would be a terrible mistake on the part of board to do this now.”
“Devastating cuts for budget mean I can’t support this either,” board member Kelly Pye said.
“I’m enthusiastic about the proposal,” Allen said. “I requested that it is placed on the discussion rather than action agenda. It’s about the district doing its best job of putting it’s best foot, face, forward. We just don’t get the story out. I just think of the lost opportunities.”
“I’ve been very supportive of this position for a long time,” board vice president Barry Snell said. “This is a position that’s vitally needed. I think it’s a position that in the long run will affect our district in ways it never has before. I understand the climate we’re in right now and understand that supporting a position like this now is hard to see [but] this kind of make considerable concessions and be part of a solution. I’m appalled that this item is here at this time in this climate.
“I don’t buy into the branding of public schools,” Keily continued. “This is not corporate America. This is not the time to be talking about creating a $100,000 position, which is the equivalent of two beginning teachers. How are my teachers going to respond to this? If this is a real crisis out there we need to start acting like it.”
“I’ve always thought a position like this could bring value to the district,” board member Jose Escarce responded. “I wish it would have been proposed a long time ago but I couldn’t defend this [now] because I think we are currently in a position to support programs as much as possible,” “Yes, of course there would be benefit but the short-term effect is negligible. I believe it would be a terrible mistake on part of board to do this now.”
“Devastating cuts for budget mean I can’t support this either,” board member Kelly Pye said.
“I’m enthusiastic about the proposal,” Allen said. “I requested that it is placed on the discussion rather than action agenda. It’s about the district doing its best job of putting it’s best foot, face, forward. We just don’t get the story out. I just think of the lost opportunities.”
“I’ve been very supportive of this position for a long time,” board vice president Barry Snell said. “This is a position that’s vitally needed. I think it’s a position that in the long run will affect our district in ways it never has before. I understand the climate were in right now and understand that supporting a position like this now is hard to see [but] this kind of position will enhance the revenue.”
“We’re not ready at this point,” board president Ralph Mechur said. “[This is a] wonderful communication plan, [but] where’s the budget for it? There’s cost associated with this. I think there needs to be a lot to talk about it before we jump in and blindly move ahead.” Mechur and several other board members questioned the legality of using BB funds for administrative salary.
“There are tons of things slipping through the cracks at the district all the time,” Allen argued, describing the PR position as a “top priority” of the PTA. “I’d like to have a plan in place,” he said, suggesting that perhaps a junior position, with “significantly less pay” and an end-of-year review, might be a better option, to “give the supervisor some bread and butter help with newsletters and things.”
“What I heard is that you would like to see something before you that is more strategic in a plan of the areas of which would be addressed and laid out,” Cuneo said. “The one thing you focused on is communicating with the public. Part of the public are our employees and we don’t do a good job communicating with our employees. That is a very critical area in this organization. Communicating within the district helps with morale.”
“We’re just going to have to limp along for a while. maybe a long while,” Escarce said. “I would have a great deal of difficulty in supporting the creation of this position this year.”
“I don’t want to bring something back to you that’s going to get put on a shelf,” Cuneo said.
The board agreed that the superintendent should meet with the board president and vice president to further discuss the matter, before bringing the item back to the board.