Last week the Register of Voters assigned the letter “H” to the CUSD initiative. Measure H proposes to change the manner in which members of the Board of Trustees of the Capistrano Unified School District are elected.
CUSD is divided into seven geographical regions or “trustee areas.” Currently each trustee must reside in the area that he or she represents, but every trustee is elected “at large” by all voters from all seven regions.
H proposes to change to an election method “by trustee area,” requiring each trustee be elected only by voters living within that trustee’s area. Those voters would no longer be able to vote on the other six trustees.
No other OC school district uses the by-district method proposed by Measure H.
Of Mission Viejo’s current 61,981 registered voters, 32,843 reside in the CUSD District. But MV is splintered among three different trustee areas.
MV voters comprise 13,680 of the 33,771 voters in Area 2 (Palazzo). In Area 6 (Addonizio) there are 5,020 MV voters out of 31,811. In Area 7 (Christensen), MV has 14,143 of the total of almost 30,000. So the largest city in the District would be a minority in each of three areas if Measure H passes, and the other four trustees – a majority of the Board – would no longer seek votes from Mission Viejo.
In Area 2 Bathgate Elementary, Hankey Elementary and Newhart Intermediate are in Mission Viejo. The rest are in Rancho Santa Margarita, Los Flores and Ladera Ranch. In Area 6, only Viejo Elementary and Capistrano Valley High are in MV; another six are in Laguna Niguel. MV has 3 of the 6 elementary schools in Area 7. Maps are shown at the bottom of this article.
Proponents claim H will increase local control by decreasing special interest influence. Opponents claim union control will increase, because unions are the largest political contributors.
Proponents secondly claim CUSD’s costs for elections will significantly decrease, saving money for other school purposes. Opponents say any savings come at the democratic expense of taking away 6 votes from each voter. They also argue increased union influence will end up using any savings for employee salaries and benefits, which already consume 85% of the District budget. Opponents additionally contend increased union power would result in additional taxation.
Those supporting H include Erin Kutnik (former unsuccessful CUSD candidate) and Capo Recall 2010, a union supported effort to replace the current CUSD Board majority.
Those opposing H include Supervisor Pat Bates, MV’s Jack Anderson (former OC Asst Sheriff & MV Planning Commission Chairman), the OC Lincoln Club, and the California Republican Assembly.
{ 9 comments… read them below or add one }
Measure H will hurt Mission Viejo and all of Capistrano Unified. Instead of being concerned with the issues of the district at large, the trustees will be more concerned about pleasing the voters in their boundaries so they get re-elected. I also like having the ability to vote for ALL the trustees. Seven trustees are deciding the fate of our students, not just one. I want the ability to vote for all seven that have a role effecting in my kid’s education.
The article does a good job showing the numerical disadvantage Mission Viejo would face since we are split among multiple trustees who would have other interests in mind as well.
I spoke on this very topic at a Mission Viejo City Council meeting near a year ago. Lance MacLean tasked staff to answer that very question, with regards to whether CUSD Mission Viejo constituents would be negatively impacted if this measure passed. I never heard what the City of Mission Viejo’s position or finding was on this. Maybe someone can answer on this now.
[Editor's Note: After Mr. Reidel's council comments last year, Trish Kelley said she would 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.]
Gerrymandering districts like this is plain old divide-and-conquer tactics that will help to further entrench Uber [extreme] Union control of the district.
I don’t know what I’m not getting about this issue. The proposal seems reasonable to me. My residential area elects and sends a representative from among us to go act on a district board to conduct the business of the district. Why the heck should I be able to influence who represents someone else that doesn’t even live in my area? To me, THAT would seem like gerrymandering. It’s like letting a democrat elect the republican candidate in a primary election… it just seems wrong. I realize that the board actions ultimately taken may not represent my personal wishes, but… that is democracy as I understand it. You don’t always get what you want.
Thank you for this article. People from all over CUSD need to understand that limiting the Trustees we can vote for is not in the students’ best interest. Each Trustee makes decisions for every student in CUSD. Cutting off a Trustee’s accountability to all areas except his or her own is dangerous for our children.
If Measure H passes, I will only be able to vote for the Trustee that would represent my children’s elementary school. I would have no vote on the Trustee representing my children’s middle school or high school. The eight Mission Viejo schools belonging to CUSD are split up between three trustee areas. My family and I would NOT be getting local representation.
Many families have a trustee for high school, another trustee for middle school and possibly a third trustee, as in my case, for elementary school. I would like to be able to vote for all of them.
Vote NO on Measure H!
In 2004 while Fleming and the aptly described “old guard” trustees where in power, Erin Kutnick published a letter explaining why district wide election of trustees was far better and superior than electing trustees by area. Only after Fleming and the old guard trustees where basically kicked out, and she had lost an election to become a trustee did Kutnick have a “change of heart.” Bottom line, the recall election and Measure H are union sponsored efforts to take control of CUSD. Remember, Kutnick and the CUSD unions, in particular, the teachers’ union, fervently pushed the current CUSD board to approve a waiver whereby the method of electing trustees in CUSD would have been changed to by area without a vote by the voters in CUSD! Thankfully, the current board of trustees rightfully decided that the voters of CUSD should decide how its trustees should be elected, not Kutnick and the CUSD unions.
.
I am surprised that this would even be an option. ALL Trustees affect ALL students. I am not in CUSD boundaries, however CUSD parents beware and spread the word.
Passing Measure H will help students in every community in CUSD.
The District could have saved approximately $175,000 if we were voting By-Trustee area in November. Parents are being asked to bring reams of paper to school at registration. $175,000 would buy a lot of paper! Cost savings will apply to all future elections and that means almost a million dollars over the next five election cycles.
No other school district in Orange County covers as large an area as CUSD. Only Santa Ana has more students than CUSD, but in a much smaller geographic area. CUSD has 56 campuses plus three charter schools. There are seven cities as well as unincorporated communities in the district. The district covers almost 200 square miles stretching 22 miles from Concordia Elementary in San Clemente to Tijeras Creek Elementary in Rancho Santa Margarita. It would take more than a year for one Trustee to visit each campus by visiting one school each week. CUSD has grown too large to adequately serve all constituents with at-large voting.
Voters generally do not invest the time to learn about candidates running for seats outside their communities. Voting By-Trustee area will empower voters in any community to make better selections based on a candidate’s record in their own community.
Candidates will not be burdened with the overwhelming costs of reaching more than 220,000 registered voters to get elected to a school board seat. Campaign costs have become prohibitive for the average person who is motivated to serve students and the community. The 2006 CUSD school board campaign received funds from an outside organization that the current trustees denied knowledge of until the name appeared on campaign financial disclosures after the election.
CUSD is required by California Education Code to examine and adjust trustee area boundaries following each federal census. The population of each trustee area must be balanced among the seven trustee areas. Residents of Mission Viejo must make their voices heard when new trustee areas come before the board. The city is currently represented by three trustees yet it has taken years of activism by Mission Viejo parents to get significant improvements to Newhart Middle School and Capistrano Valley High School. A trustee area representing a consolidated area that includes all of Mission Viejo would better represent the CUSD parents of our city. Parents and community members would know the right person to contact with their concerns.
Measure H allows for local representation on the school board. There will still be seven trustees voting on all issues. Each trustee will be better able to represent their constituents because they will know them, their neighborhoods and their schools.
Large school districts in the state are changing to the By-Trustee Voting method to meet provisions of the California Voting Rights Act. Costly lawsuits over violations of this act will be avoided with this change.
The effort to place By-Trustee voting on the ballot was initiated more than a year ago and was approved when the Orange County Committee on School District Organization voted to place this measure on the election ballot in September, 2009.
This measure was initiated and supported by a non-partisan group of parents and community members at no cost to taxpayers. The CUSD board authorized exorbitant expenditures of taxpayer money to pay attorneys to fight this change – a change that many of them were in favor of when they were elected. This was more money taken off our campuses to pay for attorneys in a year when every dollar desperately counts.
I repeat, this effort was led by parents and community members. No union of any type was involved with placing this measure on the ballot. To continue to state otherwise is irresponsible and deceitful.