City's Fighting Words Fail to Derail College Proposal

By Teresa Rochester

City officials came out swinging but that didn't stop Santa Monica College's Board of Trustees Monday night from moving forward on a controversial plan that calls, in part, for the city to annually provide $18 million for public education and help acquire land for new athletic fields, a parking lot and a job training center.

Calling it a land grab and misguided, city officials - who sat stone-faced in the front row of the packed SMC boardroom -- lambasted the proposal. But college trustees characterized the plan as a tool to spark discussion before they unanimously voted 8 to 0 to approve a series of recommendations aimed at pushing the proposal forward.

The board-approved recommendations were toned down and made more inclusive than recommendations released by college staff last week. Specifically, the recommendations ask that:

·College staff meet with community members and representatives of the city and school district concerning the proposal.

·Staff include community and agency discussions in a report that will be presented to the board before being widely circulated in the community. The earlier set of recommendations called for the report to be circulated without the inclusion of comments.

·Attorneys prepare an opinion setting forth the legal instruments available to ensure ongoing municipal support for public education. The proposal is written in such a way that a civic group could put an initiative on the ballot for the city funding.

·Staff provide periodic reports to the board on the proposal so the board can further direct staff.

"We're looking for discussion, we're looking for ideas," said Trustee Herbert Roney.

"I never thought I'd be doing more than engaging in more discussion," said Trustee Annette Shamey. "This is a liberating opportunity to discuss in the day-to-day discourse that we don't dwell on."

The six-point proposal called "Initiatives for Lifelong Learning: Endowing Lifelong Learning for the Santa Monica Community" -- which was dropped like a bombshell on the city last week -- was outlined by college President and Superintendent Piedad Robertson. "This proposal is a new strategy in meeting the needs of every one," she said.

It calls for the reconstruction of earthquake-damaged buildings and the replacement of several facilities, including a parking structure on Pico Boulevard and the liberal arts building, as well as the construction of a theater at the college's Madison Avenue Site, using the funds from the Earthquake Recovery Redevelopment Project.

The proposal also calls for a Santa Monica Education Authority, athletic fields, cultural and science programs provided by the college for Santa Monica High School and workforce training for Santa Monica residents and businesses. In addition, the proposal would endow lifelong learning for the future and call for $18 million annually from the city to be split between the school district, the college and programs for children from newborns to five-year-olds.

"Our local municipal resources are the greatest in its history," Robertson said. "Entirely new sources of revenue are coming in to our city at the highest rate ever.... We want this to be a partnership. We don't want to put pressure on anybody beyond their ability."

City officials, however, were not buying the college's pitch. Officials contend that college administrators did not fully understand the city's budget and that their proposal amounted to a land grab. City manager Susan McCarthy cautioned that the city could lose revenue because of e-commerce and the deregulation of certain industries.

"We are looking closely at deregulation and sources we think are in jeopardy," said McCarthy, who added that the city is set to possibly spend $85 million retrofitting parking structures downtown. "We look forward to discussing what the realities are."

"I hope tonight you can explain how you people can be assured your people have accurately reviewed the city's finances," Mayor Ken Genser told the board. "Ultimately you are responsible. Your name goes out on the mailers. To put it in a different perspective, $18 million is larger than the combined budgets of our fire department and libraries."

"I have to say the basic concepts are laudable," said Mayor Pro Tem Pam O'Connor. "But what kind of partnerships are being proposed? Lets' be frank folks. Let's peel away the feel good remarks. It's about capital projects. Four of the six points talk about college expansion. Very little has been said about the core of lifelong learning. What's the core of lifelong learning? It's content. Content. Not piecemeal land acquisition."

City officials also expressed concern about the potential for lawsuits by the college. Last week college officials said the proposal is written in such a way that the college could file lawsuits to force the city's hand. But Monday night prominent land use attorney, Chris Harding, who is serving as legal counsel to the college along with former city attorney Robert Myers, said the third recommendation involving the use of legal counsel does not mean pursuing legal claims.

"That no way involves pursuing legal claims," said Harding "That is not within the scope. I do think there is legal work involved in lifelong learning."

City Attorney Marsha Moutrie said her office would vigorously pursue any legitimate claims.

"We have learned that some members of the college staff have threatened council members with lawsuits if their requests aren't met," said Moutrie. "I do want to tell you in candor you don't have legal entitlement to the city's money…If you think you have legal claims against the city that are viable, we want to hear from you."

Attorney Murray Kane, who is working with the city on redevelopment matters, said college officials misled trustees about the availability of redevelopment agency funds. State legislation has rigidly set in place a formula to determine the percentage of property tax revenue that a redevelopment agency can get.

"Had you made proper inquiries, the redevelopment money you're requesting, it gets deducted from the money you're going to get anyway. That's the law," said Cain. "You can't get any more money from the Joint Power Authority no matter how you dress it up. Whatever label you put on it, you can't get any more."

The college's proposal met with mixed reviews from community members. Some encouraged the college to move forward with discussions, while others denounced the proposal.

"There are some wonderful ideas floating around the campus," said Maggie Hall, director of the college's Emeritus College. "You can plan all the programs you want, but if you don't have the space, you don't have a program."

"You should not be rattling your swords, your sabers," said Michael Tarbet, a strategist for Santa Monicans for Renters Rights. "If your goal was to get our attention, you got it. It takes away your chances of success. People who are leaders of lifelong learning were surprised."

"This is the city budget," said Ellen Brennan, president of South Beach Neighborhood Association, hoisting four huge binders onto the podium. "I have this copy. I don't understand why you don't have it. Where was SMC [at the January budget hearings]? Not a single person came forward."

Linda Sullivan, who has a daughter who attended SMC and has herself gone to the school within the last five years, said she supported the growth.

"I'm dismayed to see the college's growth treated like a private developer's growth," said Sullivan, who is married to Myers. "I'm just here to urge the board to please vote to continue this discussion."