Who won? Let's make sure it's the Culver City schools!

As the results of the School Board election have been tallied, I want to congratulate the newly elected Board members. 

Congratulations to Steve Levin, Kathy Paspalis and Sue Robins.  We all wish you well in the next four years, as you help lead our District forward.  We know that our community selected three intelligent, hard working and caring people to represent us.

It is customary to follow an election with an analysis of who won. 

The United Parents of Culver City endorsed three candidates: Steve Levin, Kathy Paspalis and Sue Robins.  The Culver City Chamber of Commerce endorsed two candidates: Steve Levin and Sue Robins.  A majority of the 4,018 voters who cast ballots, preferred these candidates. 

In contrast, the Culver City Democratic Club endorsed Karlo Silbiger and me (Claudia Vizcarra) and the Culver City Federation of Teachers and the Association of Classified Employees endorsed Karlo, Vernon Taylor and me. None of us received enough votes to gain a seat on the Board.

This has not been true in the past.  An endorsement by the Democratic Club and by the School District employees union have both been invaluable to getting elected to office in Culver City.  

The candidates of the United Parents of Culver City PAC prevailed, instead of incumbent Karlo Silbiger even though he was previously elected with 60% of the vote.   Over the summer prior to the election, UPCC organized an online petition to push the Bond measure on the ballot this November.  When three Board members, led by Karlo, voted to postpone the measure, the campaign against him began in earnest.

While the online blogs will focus
 on the struggle between the parents "union" and the teachers union, the underlying story is that the campaign to bring the bond forward seems to have gained a huge boost with this election.  

You will hear much about how it was that the "kids won". But there wasn't a candidate on the ballot who was against kids.  All the winning candidates listed teachers who didn't fully embrace their union's endorsements and backed them instead.  More importantly, there wasn't an issue on the table that was pitting teachers against students.  This helped individual teachers support candidates that the union did not endorse.

And hopefully, there won't be one. Hopefully, the teachers who backed winning candidates will not one day in the near future, realize that union membership is a bit like having auto insurance.  No one enjoys paying the premium every month, but we thank our lucky stars when we need it.

The question before us is a tricky one.  If a bond measure alone is put on the ballot and it passes, will voters then not have a taste for reauthorizing the parcel tax next November? Will the new Board decide to put both a parcel tax and a bond measure in June of next year?  

During the campaign, I spoke up for having both on the same ballot so voters can understand all the investments that are important for the District.   But as I'm starting to hear people suggest we don't need a parcel tax anymore, I think it's important to explain why it's necessary. 

While I am sure you will hear much about our crumbling infrastructure, I will concentrate on what happens inside the buildings, where the teaching and the learning happen.  Property values rise, not only because the buildings are in fine condition but because the perception of what's happening inside them is high. 

Parcel taxes are harder to pass than bonds. They require 2/3 of the vote, compared to the 55% that is required of bonds.  The good news is that they allow seniors (who often have fixed incomes) to be exempted, which bonds do not.   

Over the next few months you will hear me talk more about the issues that should encourage community members to join my call to put the parcel tax measure on the ballot and have our community support it. I will center my arguments around the important issue that was the hallmark of my campaign - the need to invest in research based strategies to improve our schools.  Of these, three stand out 1) professional development for teachers, 2) arts education and 3) class size reduction.  These investments can be paid for by a parcel tax, but not by a bond.

You may hear people talk about how these can be covered out of the new Local Control Funding Formula, or from Common Core implementation funds or even the General Fund.  

You will hear me asking questions about this and educating myself and others in this community about whether this will in fact be the case.  

Campaigns tend to accentuate our differences, passions are enflamed, people take  sides and the issues are not explored as deeply as they deserve to be.  But now that the election is over, it is critical that we delve into the issues thoroughly, because what matters most in the end, is that all of our students schools and our entire community come out as winners.