EDITOR: We are disappointment in the vote by Assemblywoman
Rebecca Cohn and Assemblyman Manny Diaz against Silicon Valley
teachers, students and taxpayers, which was communicated by your
rejection of Assembly Bill (AB) 1646. We are hoping you will
reconsider your position and join with the dedicated education
leaders you represent in a united effort to put teachers, students
and taxpayers first during these unprecedented economic times.
EDITOR:
We are disappointment in the vote by Assemblywoman Rebecca Cohn and Assemblyman Manny Diaz against Silicon Valley teachers, students and taxpayers, which was communicated by your rejection of Assembly Bill (AB) 1646. We are hoping you will reconsider your position and join with the dedicated education leaders you represent in a united effort to put teachers, students and taxpayers first during these unprecedented economic times.
Your position on AB 1646 conflicts with the doctrine of local control granted every school district in the California Constitution. Your action to essentially prohibit locally elected and accountable school and community college districts to consider private contracting as a money-saving option is harmful to those of us who have dedicated our lives to giving children the best possible public education. We are struggling to minimize teacher layoffs and cuts that would directly impact classroom instruction, but you are making it impossible for us to consider any other alternative.
AB 1646 would repeal Senate Bill (SB) 1419. Analysis by California’s top educational advocacy organizations revealed that SB 1419 used terms like “competitive bidding” and cost savings” to hide the actual effect of the bill which appears to be an effort to prevent any kind of performance based competition that would save public dollars. Please consider the facts:
• Notwithstanding, SB 1419, Education Code Section 39802 requires competitive bidding for school transportation expenditures exceeding $10,000. Moreover, Public Contracts Code Section 20111 requires competitive bidding be used for any educational service, except construction service expenditures greater than $50,000. This was the law before SB 1419 was passed and would remain law when it is repealed.
• Teacher layoffs and classroom cutbacks are exacerbated by SB 1419. By allowing school and community college districts to find the lowest possible cost for quality non-instructional services like transportation, maintenance and landscaping, savings would definitely be utilized to mitigate budget cuts.
• School and community college districts are already required to adhere to the same employee personnel protections that all employers face regardless of SB 1419.
• SB1419 prohibits the consideration of private performance based competition by prescribing criteria that is vague, impossible to meet and that is likely to result in costly litigation.
We were very offended at the assertion made by Assemblywoman Cohn, during the Assembly Education Committee meeting that – without a state mandate – local education leaders would subvert the Education Code or disregard the best interests of teachers, students and taxpayers. This undeserved comment was both disappointing and without basis.
The fact is that we value public funds and always strive to spend them wisely. Moreover, we are directly accountable to taxpayers, and believe that they should not be required to sustain an inefficient system. That is why California’s entire education leadership opposed SB 1419 including the California School Boards Association, the Association of California School Administrators, School Services of California, Inc., the California Association of School Business officials and the California County Superintendents Educational Services Association. These organizations, which today support AB 1646, have a long history of advocating on behalf of students and quality education, and we are proud to join them by standing for local education leaders throughout California.
The sides in this issue are clear. We stand on one side fighting to protect students from a budget crisis not of our own making. Your position is the opposite as evidenced by SB 1419, which you both voted for last year as well as AB 1646, which you both rejected this year. Protecting public employees unfortunately appears to be your top educational priority.
California and the Silicon Valley are facing a financial crisis of the highest magnitude. California school and community college districts could save at least $100 million without raising taxes, cutting services, or laying off teachers. We are not seeking to mandate contracting, but rather to protect a proven option and maintain control of our own budgets without impediment from Sacramento as provided by the California Constitution. Open, fair and honest competition is the foundation upon which the Silicon Valley was created, and that same commitment to excellence should be the foundation of our public schools.
On behalf of the teachers that work so hard, the parents and taxpayers who support public schools and the students who deserve the best public education possible, we ask that your reconsider your position on AB 1646.
Carolyn McKennan,
Superintendent
Morgan Hill School District
Editor’s note: This letter also was signed by other superintendents of Santa Clara County school districts and leaders of statewide school organizations
