Perhaps the only feature of Santa Monica life more predictable than the tides is perpetual confusion over the status of Malibu’s petition to carve out its own school district.
As of this week, the proposal remains mired in delays and controversy with declarations of intent, but little actual progress towards resolving the long simmering dispute at the local level and County officials preparing to revote on the issue after failing to properly administer the vote at their last meeting.
On Wednesday, the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District Board of Education directed Superintendent Antonio Shelton to reengage with Malibu consultants and city officials to address ongoing concerns about the proposed school district separation.
The unanimous decision came after extensive discussion of unresolved issues in the three agreements needed to create an independent Malibu Unified School District and promises from the Board that they do in fact want the situation resolved.
"I think what becomes clear to me is this only works when we work together," said Board Member Jon Kean. "We are so close to this. It is clear from this presentation that the ideas behind our mediation have been successful, that we have models and ideas that need to be finalized."
The board declined to outright approve the existing draft agreements despite pleas from Malibu officials, who expressed readiness to move forward immediately.
"On behalf of the City of Malibu, I implore you, approve these agreements tonight," said Malibu City Councilwoman Haylynn Conrad. "We are fully committed to moving them forward at the city as soon as possible."
Last year the two sides announced plans for three key elements, a Revenue Sharing Agreement, an Operational Transfer Agreement and a Joint Powers Agreement. However, those agreements were never formalized and instead Malibu pursued a decision from County officials to mandate a split.
That petition was rejected recently, restarting discussions about the agreements and a voluntary split.
Financial concerns dominated this week’s meeting, with the district's Financial Oversight Committee highlighting potential deficits for Malibu in the first five years after separation and other fiscal vulnerabilities.
Shin Green of Blue Shore Consulting, the district's consultant, acknowledged concerns about Malibu's financial viability but expressed confidence that solutions are within reach.
"I do believe that there are some minor things that we can clean up in the agreement that will solve those things," Green said. "They are not things that we believe can unilaterally be done. Again, an agreement is between the two parties."
Several board members expressed frustration that negotiations had stalled in recent months, with Kean taking partial blame for earlier setbacks.
"I take my share of blame for that," Kean said, referring to a meeting last fall. "I thought it would be a positive. I was wrong. I think what we've learned from that is, it allowed us to see what happens when we don't work together."
The Santa Monica-Malibu Classroom Teachers Association expressed concerns about protections for educators in both communities and supported efforts to reopen negotiations.
"The agreement establishes a 4% annual growth target for SMUSD's unrestricted general fund revenues. However, it does not account for rising labor costs in both districts," said Claudia Batista, SMCTA president. "There's no plan built in to meet the actual compensation needs of the educators and staff who serve our students daily."
Batista also raised concerns about only one year of job security being guaranteed for Malibu teachers under the current operational transfer agreement, though Malibu representatives stated they would extend that to four years.
Board members debated whether such a promise could be legally binding on a future school board that doesn't yet exist.
The board's direction includes several components: reengaging with Malibu consultants, reaching out to the Malibu subcommittee for new mediation sessions, consulting with the Financial Oversight Committee on risk exposure, holding information sessions with employee unions, and fine-tuning the agreements.
"Let's stop looking backwards," Kean said. "We cannot look backwards and get this completed. This has to be a results and outcome-driven process."
Malibu representatives expressed disappointment but remained committed to working toward a resolution.
"Let's bring this chapter to a close and work together for the good of our students and both our communities," Conrad said. "You have been committed to this day for years. Know that this is the best way forward."
Board Member Stacy Rouse, the only representative from Malibu, suggested providing regular updates at board meetings to maintain transparency about progress.
"I think that kind of level of communication is really helpful to everyone," Rouse said. "I think that can substitute for a date, because then it doesn't just get lost and feel like they say they're working."
The renewed negotiations come as the Los Angeles County Committee on School District Organization prepares to revote on Malibu's 2017 petition on May 7, after a procedural error in its April 2 meeting. The committee had voted 6-5 to deny the petition, citing staff reports that the proposed split failed to meet eight of nine required criteria.
Despite the setbacks, board members expressed optimism about finding solutions.
"I really do think we can get there," said Board Member Lori Lieberman. "The tone that I heard and the willingness to participate there, that we can get back together and that it will still be there."
