The makeup and membership of the Orange County Board of Education (OCBE) is being exclusively targeted by state bill SB907 to force a 7 member board despite the board currently having this authority should it be deemed necessary. Orange County families and schools are solely impacted while ignoring all other counties in California and the cost to Orange County voters to include an election for these positions. With so many issues confronting our educational system today, it is imperative that the governing bodies of these districts and schools are intimately familiar with the dynamics and issues that are specific to the individual community. Allow me to explain why Orange County constituents should pay close attention.
The basic premise and intent of this legislation is on wresting control over the education managed by the Orange County Board of Education and diluting voter representation from the current elected five (5) local representatives to seven (7) at a time when the Orange County population has declined for the last 3 years. There will be another unelected county administrative process to reorganize the board with new boundaries and new representatives. The Board has as its secretary and executive officer the County Superintendent of Schools, who is elected by the people every four years. Changing the date for the election and adding two additional seats is an unnecessary expense that challenges the institutional memory that these Trustees garner over their terms. This money is better served going to the students and schools in the county.
SB907 also focuses on the election of the trustees from a plurality to a majority. In a representative government where there might be more than 2 candidates for a position, having a plurality best represents the electorate. Critics of the bill contend that there is not enough diversity on the board. However, there are two women as well as Latino representation currently serving on the board. It is clear that a 4 year term allows the board of trustees the time to focus and really understand the needs and dynamics of education in the community. Within the Charter schools that are managed by OCBE, personalization of education is important given the special needs of many of the constituent children. The current OCBE has been instrumental in delivering this thoughtful oversight. Allowing Sacramento to insert themselves into this legislative process is the very antithesis of democratic ideals which grants that education should be local within a democratic framework in order to serve the best interests of our students. Tune in to the OCBE meeting from May 1 to see just a small piece of the significant impact that these OCBE trustees have. The authors of this legislation are thwarting democracy by forcing a construct that currently exists at the local level.
The OCBE has an outstanding representation of its constituents, demonstrated by a lack of evidence to the contrary. This county school board has supported county students that are adjudicated, homeless and incarcerated. They have been responsible for the most vulnerable children in the county because they know Orange County. They understand the challenges that are faced on the ground. The OCBE has participated immensely in assisting parents who want to transfer their children to other school districts. Perhaps most importantly in these troubling political and cultural unstable times, they support safe schools and the emotional well-being of children who suffer from trauma or mental illness.
Members of this OCBE have been personally involved in creating the Samueli Academy, and the SunBurst Academy that takes kids that might normally be incarcerated, and provides an educational opportunity in a military environment on the Los Alamitos Joint Military base. Many of these children have been so positively impacted by this program. Not only have they graduated high school, but some have continued to graduate from Ivy League institutions.
This county board has approved so many strong charter schools and supported school choice for families and parents because they have a vested interest in the success of education in the county. SB 907 creates a direct challenge to these ideals at an unnecessary cost to the taxpayers for a process that is currently in place at the board level.
The OCBE has consistently supported school choice, the rights of parents, and strong public charter schools. Our very own OCBE has been the most productive county board of education in California that has produced top notch public charter schools. So why change?
While it is clear that Orange County has benefitted so dramatically from the local involvement of this board, why would Sacramento legislators challenge local control of education? Has there been a demonstrated need to resolve issues that have not been addressed? Red flags are observed because SB 907 focuses solely on Orange County and none of the other county boards in California. In Los Angeles, board members are appointed which eliminates any voter choice in the administration of their curriculum, removing the democratic process from the very constituents that have a vested interest in the success of local management of schools. If the State is going to put forward educational legislation, the quality of Los Angeles schools due in large part to their appointed board might be a better focus for the well being of our children. In and of itself, this state bill appears to be a power grab and capitulation to special interests to try and override the will of Orange County voters and to create uniform one-size-fits-all educational content.
Diluting local control serves to only weaken democracy and local control to the detriment of students.
Karen Jaffe is a 25 year Irvine resident where she lives with her husband and Simba, golden doodle. They raised three children who all went to both public and private schools in Irvine. Karen is also a founding member of Irvine Watchdog, a public transparency organization for local government.
Opinions expressed in community opinion pieces belong to the authors and not Voice of OC.
Voice of OC is interested in hearing different perspectives and voices. If you want to weigh in on this issue or others please email opinions@voiceofoc.org.
Correction: an earlier version of this story incorrectly said, Changing this to every two years is an additional unnecessary expense that challenges the institutional memory that these Trustees garner over their terms. The author regrets the error.
