It appears likely the Mission Viejo City Council will adopt a resolution Tuesday opposing Measure H. The Initiative will be on the November ballot proposing to change the method of election for Capistrano School Board trustees.
Currently CUSD trustees are elected at-large and answer to all voters in the District. Measure H would cause voters to elect a single trustee from one of seven segregated areas. Mission Viejo is the largest city in the District, but would be splintered into three areas.
Critics of H complain voters would lose 6 votes if it is passed. Some families with children in different schools across two or more areas are concerned they could not vote for the trustee representing a school where one or more of their children attend.
The council resolution is being brought by Mayor Trish Kelley. Last year Kelley said she would promptly bring an agenda item opposing “by-district” elections in CUSD. She didn’t, so the Dispatch contacted her. On 10/19/09 she replied that she hadn’t changed her mind but wanted to gather more information before placing it on the agenda. Last week the Dispatch again reminded Mrs. Kelley in an Editor’s Note after readers strongly opposed H. [Re: Will Measure H Hurt MV?]
In part, the proposed resolution states:
This City Council believes that “by-area” segregation of the District Trustees will not provide the greatest benefit to the residents of Mission Viejo. . . The City Council desires to preserve the equal voice of all those within the District by ensuring that each voter has an equal right to elect all the Trustees of the District.
{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }
The sad truth about this whole [Measure H] thing is that it is a ploy by a few disenfranchised folks who were unable to control the board under the current process.
The original effort by the ‘parents and community members’ is just not factually correct. The real players behind Measure H are:
Original initiators per public records submitted in court were:
The Rest of the story:
The reality is that when you look at the above comments from the other posters, the vast majority of them are from people who are not ‘insiders’, and most can see the damage that voting YES on Measure H will cause a town like Mission Viejo.
One other little tidbit… In Dana Point (where I live), our union backed choice is an 18-year-old freshly minted high school graduate. The Union takes approx $10K out of the teachers dues each month for their political action committee (Called HOPE) and with this money, if they chose to target my area, they could easily spend $5-$8 per vote to start picking off areas for control.
Remember, the union is the only special interest in the district with a financial return incentive for their ‘investments’ in their candidates.
All I ask is that we recognize that this is not an altruistic ‘money saving’ effort and in fact, the County Committee and the Union wanted this to go to a special election (at a premium of $450,000) or for the entire choice to be ‘waived’ and prevent any of us from getting a chance to vote on this giant change.
Please look beyond the altruistic sounding rhetoric of ‘parents and community member led’ and look at who benefits the most financially by this effort and you will clearly see that it is those that are bitter that they lost their power structure in Capo and their supporters (which is primarily the CUEA).
So, as deceitful as Ms. Sdao may think I am in placing the responsibility squarely at the foot of the union, I firmly believe that this is led by folks whose focus is not the Children, Parents OR Voters.
Please vote NO on Measure H
This is just another example of Trish Kelley poking her city nose into school district issues. Remember it was Trish Kelley who was an avid supporter of the former Superintendent of Schools (the dismissed ) James Fleming.
As to Ms Sado–does she even have children in school anymore ??
I whole heartedly agree that Measure H is a terrible idea. “At large” versus “by district” elected offices has been a raging debate for more than half a century. Ironically given the above commentary, it is often forced by Court order when some segment of the population (Hispanic, Asian, etc.) complains that while they are a signficant portion of the community as a whole, they are never able to elect representation because they do not constitute a majority of the whole. Typically a law suit is brought and a court finds that the “at large” election is a violation of the federal Civil Rights Act or federal election laws. None of those arguments apply here and this attempt at “districting” seems to be nothing more than political shenanigans.
Even though I am not in CUSD, practically speaking this is not a good measure. All I have to do is read the measure background, and wonder who thought long and hard enough to realize the potential benefits that may be reaped by some. I hope that common sense prevails and voters do the right thing. Being informed before voting is key to a successful outcome.