myBurbank Talks

The Great Bond Debate: Examining Measure ABC for Burbank Schools

Craig Sherwood, Joel Schlossman, Andy Cantwell Season 2 Episode 16

Is Measure ABC a community savior or a fiscal misstep? Join us for a gripping debate on the $485 million bond proposal for Burbank school facilities, featuring Joel Schlossman, an outspoken critic, and Andy Cantwell, an advocate from the Burbank Unified School District. Our discussion unfolds like a presidential debate, tackling the complexities of facility bonds, tax implications, and the broad spectrum of community support, from teachers' unions to the Chamber of Commerce. Experience the clash of viewpoints as we question the impact of this bond on the educational landscape amidst declining enrollment and financial oversight challenges.

Our episode doesn't shy away from the tough questions about financial management and accountability within the Burbank school district. We explore the roles of an independent citizens oversight committee and grapple with the implications of past fiscal missteps. Both Joel and Andy bring their own fire to the discussion, whether it's about the pressing need for infrastructure upgrades or the controversial allocation of funds for DEI training. The dialogue intensifies as we address public skepticism and the broader economic context, with both guests weighing in on the district's fiscal responsibilities.

Community involvement takes center stage as we discuss the development of a Facility Master Plan and the potential financial impacts on Burbank residents. From the prioritization of school projects to concerns over administrator salaries, the debate is as dynamic as it is informative. Whether you're a local resident affected by these decisions or someone interested in the intricacies of school finance, this episode offers a thorough examination of the pressing issues facing Burbank's educational system. Don't miss the thought-provoking insights and passionate exchanges that define this critical discussion.

Support the show

Speaker 1:

From deep in the Burbank Media District. It's time for another edition of my Burbank Talks, presented by the staff of my Burbank. Now let's see what's on today's agenda as we join our program. Hello Burbank, craig Sherwood here with you once again, and we have a very unique show today. So I want to welcome you to a unique debate that we put together for the upcoming November election, where we are going to discuss the school district's measure ABC, where voters are being asked to approve a bond for school facilities in Burbank.

Speaker 1:

Today, we have Mr Joel Schlossman with us, who is a staunch opponent of the bond measure on the no side, and Andy Cantwell, the Assistant Superintendent of Administrative Services for the Burbank Unified School District, in support. We are going to use the same format as the recent presidential election debate we will ask a question and each side will be given a two-minute time to answer the question, followed by a one-minute follow-up period. Neither side has been given these questions in advance. I want to also thank a couple of my Burbank readers who helped me form these questions in advance. I want to also thank a couple of my Burbank readers who helped me form these questions who asked to remain anonymous, which we will do.

Speaker 1:

We are also going to start off with a two-minute opening statement. Before we started, we flipped a coin to see who was going to go first, and Andy was the winner of the coin toss and is selected to go last at the closing statements, and Joel will be taking the first question. So right now we're going to give each person a chance to give their opening statement. So, joel, go ahead, you're up first.

Speaker 2:

Well, mr Sherwood, thank you very much for hosting this discussion. It is of paramount importance for all citizens here in Burbank. I think that the school board five elected members have done a horrible job of educating the public and they are to be distrusted, and they've told us a number of things that are flat out untrue. The last time we had a parcel tax, they told us there was no money for raises, but in the intervening years and immediately after the parcel tax was defeated, three raises were given to the employees, and we'll talk about that in a little bit. This is a big deal. It is not a four-year term, this is a 30-year term and it has the. What it will do is it will devastate our youth and it will devastate our senior citizens who can't go back to work, and it hurts our students several ways. If you want your kid to do well, the best thing to do is to spend time with them, and this bond necessitates parents work more hours to come up with more money to service the bond and pay more for everything in Burbank, and that takes time away from the students where they could be with their parents, and that helps. It helps our kids a great deal.

Speaker 2:

So I've asked a number of questions at the podium. I've been going to their meetings for not years, but really decades. I've been going to their meetings for not years but really decades and I must say that this makeup of this board I've never been treated so poorly. I've asked questions and I've rarely gotten answers. And they're very straightforward questions. I asked the superintendent at the last meeting I attended. I gave him this exact piece of paper. It says is Measure ABC, a new tax, yes or no? And he would not answer. He deferred the question, and that's the type of thing we're up against. So thank you.

Speaker 1:

Andy, your two minutes starts now. Give us your opening remarks, please.

Speaker 3:

Greg, thank you so much for having us this afternoon. Joel, I appreciate you joining as well. I can think of nowhere I'd rather be on my vacation afternoon than here. And I say that just as a preface to say that, as a school district employee, there are certain things I cannot do on district time. And so I did actually take a vacation time to be able to be here today to not only educate but also advocate for the bond. Vacation time to be able to be here today to not only educate but also advocate for the bond. Before I do, I'd like to just share who I am so that way our listeners know who it is that's speaking in support of Measure ABC.

Speaker 3:

My name is Andy Cantwell. I was raised in Ventura County. I went kindergarten through 12th grade in the same school district in Moorpark Unified. When I was a sophomore in college I had the opportunity to return to my home school district and begin working and quickly identified my passion for education. I realized that in public education we, uniquely, are able to change family trees. We are doing incredible work. Perhaps the greatest source of social change, the greatest source of economic mobility, is our public education system.

Speaker 3:

I had too much respect for teachers to think that I'd be any good at teaching, and so I decided a little bit of an orthodox path into administration. I went to law school, received my Juris Doctorate and a Master's in Business administration and finance. I also went on to USC although I'm sporting my UCLA Bruin colors today just because there's so few of us in the district office but I did receive a certificate graduate certificate in school business management from USC. My career has spanned from Santa Barbara County Education Office to the Ojai Unified School District, to a brief stint out in Texas and now, most recently, here in Burbank. For the past two years, in my role as the Assistant Superintendent for Administrative Services, I'm responsible for, among other things, the fiscal, health and fiscal condition of our district, as well as our facilities, and I look forward to being able to discuss both those this afternoon.

Speaker 1:

Fantastic's great to have you both here, joel. You're up first with the first question here, and that question is the bond. As written authorizes the burbank unified school district to issue and sell general obligation bonds in the amount of 485 million 205 thousand dollars. So the campaign for the bond be successful. Will the district purchase? Would or should the district purchase that amount in one lump sum or in smaller amounts to coincide with projects as they occur? How will the purchasing message affect the cost to the property owners that will be responsible for funding them? So, joel, you have two minutes.

Speaker 2:

Well, I quickly want to respond to Mr Cantwell. Obviously I'm not in the same league as you with your law degree and so forth. I respect that very much. But the important part that you left out is you don't live in Burbank and you won't be paying a penny of this bond. So that's something I hope folks will take note of. To answer your question, mr Sherwood, you know I'm not the person in charge making those types of decisions. That question is better settled for Mr Cantwell. But I'll tell you. Obviously you should not sell all the bonds at once. You should sell them as they're needed. Why would you destroy you know? Why would you start paying interest on money right away when you're not going to be using it? It's a question that is really simplistic for anybody to answer. It would be foolish to do something like that. Grab all, guarantee you all $485 million will be.

Speaker 2:

All those bonds will be sold. There won't be one penny left. Now what we have to talk about is the interest on those bonds, which are projected to be approximately one. With the interest it's going to be 1.1 billion dollars, and this is devastating our communities. Take that much money it. This amount of money is greater than the two previous bonds that we've issued. Combined. It's greater than any bond issued by the city. It's historically. There's never been any bonds bigger than this. And the sad part, mr Sherwood, it's not needed and we'll talk about that, hopefully of ways around it. But the BUSD has gone straight to our pocketbooks and that's the simplest way for them to get money, when they should stop being wasteful and mismanaging the money they do have.

Speaker 1:

All right.

Speaker 3:

Andy, you're up. That's a great question. I think it really highlights the reality that there are safeguards both federally and at the state level to ensure appropriate expenditure of funds, and so one example of that would be that federal IRS guidelines actually prohibit the sale of or issuance of the bond proceeds all at once. The intent is that you are supposed to obligate up to 85, or you're supposed to obligate 85 percent of the bond funds within 36 months of their issuance. So what that means would be the intent would be to have three or four issuances Right now our program is for four issuances and those would take place the first of which, if the bond does pass, would be in 2025. And then every two to three years thereafter as we draw down or spend those bond funds. And so certainly it's important to understand again the safeguards that exist here locally with the Assistant Oversight Committee. But even beyond the local oversight, there are other guidelines statutory that ensure appropriate retention and expenditure of the bond funds.

Speaker 1:

Okay, joel, you have one minute to follow up to follow up.

Speaker 2:

Well, you know, we've heard this same old shtick before from the school district, two times before, about independent supervision, and the truth of the matter is your committee has never denied you anything. Whatever you ask for, the committee that you appoint approves your spending request, and there are certain procedures in effect where you're supposed to have committee members that are qualified. And the fact of the matter is, during this last committee run for this last bond approximately five years worth you had, I'm told, a committee member who was not qualified. So these are the types of things. Now, I know you're going to spend the money. There's no doubt about that. We can all spend money and we'll talk about that. But if you hire somebody to find problems and pay them $512,000, they're going to find problems and that's what you've done.

Speaker 1:

Okay, andy, go ahead and follow up, please.

Speaker 3:

I think we've gone on a little bit of a tangent from the question of the timing and method of issuance, but I want to make sure that I do address Joel's concern over the Citizen Oversight Committee. I'm sure we'll have a chance to talk about that a little bit more later.

Speaker 3:

But I just want to ensure that, for now, that we focus on the importance of an oversight committee, that is, a watchdog entity. They are not the approval entity, but again, we'll we'll talk more as this discussion unfolds on the importance of assist and oversight committee. With regard to, again, the issuance of the, the bonds, I look forward and hope that we'll have the opportunity to have that first issuance in April or May of 25. We right now have a AA positive rating and, as interest rates have been dropping, we're looking at this being a really strategic and great opportunity for the timing of potential bond sales.

Speaker 1:

Okay, fantastic. Let's move on to question two here. There's a statewide and, andy, this is for you. First, there is a statewide school facilities bond on the November ballot. Why do Burbank voters need to support a local bond when this proposition authorizes $10 billion to be spent on school facilities? So to pass? How can Burbank benefit from it? What amount of funding can we expect to receive and how can the funds be spent?

Speaker 3:

Greg, that's actually one of the most common questions I've been getting as I speak to the community about this bond, so there is some confusion. There's a state bond measure. It's Proposition 2. If it passes again, it will allow the issuance of $10 billion of bonds for school facilities. That's not only kindergarten through 12th grade, but it's also community colleges would have access to those funds.

Speaker 3:

However, the most critical element to know is that the only way that Burbank can access those funds would be through having a local match, and so the match requires that, depending on the type of funding, either a dollar for dollar match. Local dollars to make available state funds or certain types of projects require a 60% match for 40% funding from the state. Require a 60% match for 40% funding from the state. In total, it would open ourselves up to being able to access up to $40 million of additional revenues for Burbank, and so, if Prop 2 passes, it would create a great opportunity for us to leverage local dollars even further. However, again, the most important thing to understand is that those dollars don't become available to us unless we have the local match. There are multiple ways in which we could have a local match, but the most direct would be Measure ABC.

Speaker 1:

Fantastic, Joel. You have two minutes Go ahead.

Speaker 2:

You know, mr Cantwell, bonds are paid through. Our method of collection is through our property taxes, and if you own real property, whether it's a shopping mall or a house or a condominium, you're going to get a tax bill and this bond is going to cause your tax bill to have a line item for the Burbank School District and if you don't pay it, you can lose your house, you can lose your property. The county comes in and takes your property away if you don't have the ability to pay it Now. That doesn't happen instantaneously. It takes a number of years. And with regard to what's going on in Los Angeles, I haven't studied that, but I suspect there's waste and mismanagement there as well, but I don't know because I don't attend their school board meetings.

Speaker 2:

But I can tell you what I witness, and I witness our school board members saying, for example, charlene Tabbit, $10,000 means nothing to us. You know words to that effect. That's nothing for an organization our size and when you have that attitude it's problematic for the taxpayers. You should be safeguarding our money Now. This is interesting to me because we're talking about where the money goes. You get $219 million now and you probably get a cost of living increase every year and that's what we should be talking about to facilitate the repair of the facilities, which you know need money from time to time. I'm not arguing with you on that point. I'm arguing with you about where the money goes now, and I've got some points here about in the last 10 years, teacher salary have gone up 47% Now. That's 4.7% a year. That's reasonable, but the administrators have gone up 95% and I find that to be problematic when you want to reach into my pocket for more money.

Speaker 1:

Okay, thank you, Andy. Go ahead and you have one minute to respond.

Speaker 3:

Well, I think Joel brought up a number of concerns that, again, I've heard him express previously, as well as others, and I think there's a few important things to highlight here. First, a concern over administrator salaries. Again, a general obligation school facility bond may not be used for administrator salaries. That's just yet another safeguard in place with facility bonds, and so, for those who are concerned that it may go further toward government bureaucracy, that is not actually a permissible use of those funds.

Speaker 3:

I think the heart of what Joel has expressed at board meetings and already in this conversation is really the reality that times are difficult economically. We are seeing that at the federal level. That's the number one issue that is likely driving the federal elections, and we know it certainly is hitting here in Burbank as well, here in Burbank as well. I think that we've already talked about the importance of education helping drive a capable and skilled workforce. I also just want to highlight here, though, right now, that the current property tax bills already include the payment of the bond proceeds from the 1997 bond in 2013. And so what we're talking about here is a continuation of an existing tax rate, not a new tax rate.

Speaker 1:

Okay, Thank you. Let's move on here to question number three. And Andy, I do appreciate you being here today, but you are a district employee, you know, by trade, even though this is a vacation day for you.

Speaker 1:

I probably know better places to spend my vacations, and you can provide a lot of factual information, but let me ask you who is leading the campaign to get voters to approve the bond? Because of course, it can't be individuals in the district. So who's leading the campaign? Is there an organized campaign with a registered committee? If so, do they have a professional consultant working with them? And finally, why aren't there? Why are they not making the case for the?

Speaker 3:

yes vote. If they are around, this question starts with me.

Speaker 1:

Yes, okay, I'm sorry. I'm sorry, joe. I'm sorry, the question was for you. I'm sorry, okay.

Speaker 2:

Well, I'll use a few seconds of my time just to respond to a few things, as you can't well said earlier, you know I voted for the lottery and that was supposed to help our schools, and what the lottery did when that passed is they took that money, they gave us the lottery money, but they shrunk the general fund money that we were getting, so it became a wash. And that's the type of trickery that this school district is going to pull on the citizenry of Burbank. You're going to say, oh, we're going to use every penny for facilities, but that frees up the general fund money that's not being used to go to salaries. So we know what's going to happen. It's a lot of trickery going on and the unions are pulling the strings of this school board and I've got documents here to prove that because they gave donations and who they gave donations to, and President Weisberg all but admits it. So that's something else.

Speaker 2:

Education is changing. Mr Cantwell, you think this is going to be the same in 30 years? It's not. There's a new model coming and it's called AI and our kids are going to get a better education from it. You know, right now students get about a minute of individualized attention in the classroom and they're going to spending time going from classroom to classroom all day long and this is an impediment in their education. With AI, they can get the full attention, individualized attention and a better education, and that's where we're going. You can fight it all you want, but it's going to happen and it's going to be a different landscape, and not in 30 years, in a few years. It's coming fast.

Speaker 2:

Now you left off something else. If we vote no on this thing, our tax bills are going to go down, and that's a fact. Now can you use some extra money? I know I can. I know I can use that help and I think a lot of families here in Burbank can, because we've been good stewards towards paying these previous two bonds. We've been generous with you, and you mismanage the money and you don't want to talk about it.

Speaker 1:

You kind of admit it now that you got sloppy work.

Speaker 2:

Well, where was?

Speaker 1:

your oversight committee during that now, okay, that's your time. Okay, thank you.

Speaker 3:

Okay, andy, go ahead why don't you have two minutes for your question, craig? Would you mind actually repeating that question? I know Joel brought forward many great points, but it felt like maybe I missed her, so the question wasn't quite.

Speaker 1:

Yeah, basically you're a school district employee although you're on your own private time. And is there a yes on Measure ABC committee? Is there a professional consultant involved and why aren't they involved in anything, if there is?

Speaker 3:

Great, okay, I did understand. I just, based on Joel's response, was concerned that I may have misheard. I think that the one thing I can glean from Joel's comment was that we do have the support of our teachers union and classified union. What really makes Burbank special and this Measure ABC special is that it doesn't by any means end there. We also have received the official endorsement from the PTA, from our parents, from Parent Teacher Association. We also have received endorsement from the Chamber of Commerce here in Burbank, and so there is an incredible grouping of individuals who have come together to support this that you don't usually see when it comes to local district bonds.

Speaker 3:

Usually you might see the support of a certificated union the teachers but that may not have the support of the class fighter. You may see the support of the employees, but you don't see the support of the local chamber. You see the support of one group, but you don't necessarily see the parents. And so really, I think it's a great testimony to what makes Burbank unique, the investment that we see here across the board, that there is so many different individuals who have poured time into Measure ABC. There is a committee. I understand that they are working diligently right now on putting together mailers as well as on posters. I am confident that this community will see in the very near future much more visible signs of promotion for Measure ABC.

Speaker 1:

Okay, joel, you have one minute.

Speaker 2:

Yeah, well, to answer your question, there is a website that is telling you to kind of a rudimentary website, but nonetheless answer your question is the person who it's registered to does not live in Burbank. It's registered to a woman named Wendy Harville, doesn't live in Burbank. So who's who's? Who's funding this thing? I'll tell you, it's right here the unions. The unions who stand to benefit Mr Sherwood, the unions who want to get the money, these hundreds of millions of dollars. That's who's funding it, and these campaign disclosure forms show. All you got to do is follow the money. So there's the answer to your question. It's not the moms and pops, it's not the Pta donating money for this thing. The unions who are controlling the school board members. And the proof of that is right here. If I have, uh, eight seconds left, I don't, but I'll yield the last few seconds okay, andy have a minute to follow up um, I'm not quite sure, joel.

Speaker 3:

if you're referring to the unions that work within the school district, primarily the Burbank Teachers Association and the Classified School Employee Association, we are grateful to have the formal endorsement of both those groups. We also have been reaching out to the community. We also have been reaching out to the community and so we have a great cross section of the trade unions. The trades that have we see pretty evident from both the financial disclosures as well as the, the endorsements on the website is a incredible cross-section of individuals in support of investing in our schools here locally all right, okay, and his next question is for you.

Speaker 1:

Uh, joel has stated in a letter to my Burbank that he believes that the district has mismanaged prior bonds and accepted substandard work. What I do not hear is recognition that the HVAC equipment, the air conditioning and the roofs that are part of the 1997 bond are approaching 30 years old. Isn't it logical to think that at this time for them to be replaced? Wouldn't most voters support this, in an effort to keep our schools in good condition, just like homeowners do with their own properties?

Speaker 3:

Yeah, craig, I think you just nailed it really really well.

Speaker 3:

I don't believe that there's been gross mismanagement of the prior bonds.

Speaker 3:

I think that there's an incredible commitment that we've seen from members both of the former school boards and of staff.

Speaker 3:

I am sure that there have been times where the work was not up to the standard that I would expect or we would expect today.

Speaker 3:

We just were actually redoing the Burbank High School pool, and solid utilities were not properly buried at their proper depth and instead were right below the concrete finish, and so what was going to be a project focused on one matter became a project that had to also focus on utility infrastructure improvements, and so what we're finding as we go into the utilities is that some of these campuses that are 80, 90, 100 years old have utilities that are just as old, and so we are having to invest significantly in the replacement and modernization of the utility infrastructure. As far as though an indictment about the fact that we have roofs that need replacement. As you just said, usually a commercial roof has between a 20 and 30 year expected life, and hvac unit is between 15 and 20 year usable life, and so the fact that these prior bonds were invested immediately for the benefit of our students and staff back in 1997, makes sense that now here we are, almost 30 years later, needing to replace those exact same units and those same roofing systems.

Speaker 1:

Okay, thank you, joel. Go ahead and please respond. Thank you.

Speaker 2:

Mr Cantwell for admitting that there has been mismanagement. Now, your words were no gross mismanagement and I take that to an acknowledgement of the mismanagement, and there certainly has been mismanagement. So we're on the same page there. Now. You talked about HVAC, heating, venting, ventilation and air conditioning and roofing. Now we're told over and over by Ponser, kamkar and Weisberg that these are priorities. But when Perkins-Eastman looked at the situation, these items don't even appear on the top 10 list.

Speaker 2:

And during that presentation, perkins-eastman said our schools are in good shape. We are lucky. Our schools are safe. They are not seismically dangerous for our students and if they were, you wouldn't allow our students to go there. They are, in fact, safe school. Uh, perkins Eastman, I forgot what I was going to say. The main point is oh, I remember you said at that meeting, when Perkins Eastman's gave gave their speech, you said we are not obligated to follow Perkins Eastman, you can do what you want with the money. And that is scary to me because we had. We have people that want to develop housing and that want to want to have free kindergarten and do all kinds of things that are outside the scope of what you're calling for, but the specific language of this bond allows you to do what you want essentially with this money.

Speaker 1:

Thank, you Okay? Uh, Andy, you have one minute to respond.

Speaker 3:

Joel, you and I don't always agree, but when we have our private conversations that others aren't privy to and the cameras aren't running, I always appreciate that. You are cordial, you are respectful, you hear me out. I would ask for that same decency now. I believe it's inappropriate to put words into my mouth or to make accusations or claims of things I didn't say. Me saying that I am not aware of any gross mismanagement of prior funds is in no way an admission that there was some mismanagement of funds, you know.

Speaker 3:

I think that we both need to make sure that we're listening and allowing our points to stand on their own, without trying to imply or outright state things that just are factually inaccurate. Trying to imply or outright state things that just are factually inaccurate. With regard to the types of projects that Perkins Eastman identified, the roof replacements were priority 1B. 1b because they considered safety to be 1A and they considered the roof replacements in the category 1B. 1b because they considered safety to be 1A and they considered the roof replacements in the Category 1B. Category 1 was the top priority category. So I don't know where you have identified a list of 10 projects that you don't believe roofing is a part of.

Speaker 1:

Okay thank you, Joel. You have one minute to respond.

Speaker 2:

Well, mr Cantwell, it would have been nice if you brought the 500 and some odd page Perkins Eastman report with you to cite the facts, because I read the report and you know this is the type of dialogue that we have at the city council. When I'm standing at the podium, when I say something in a stern voice or a definitive voice that I'm sure about, I'm instantly attacked, and that's kind of a little bit what we got, what I just witnessed from you right now. I heard you say gross mismanagement. So let's just ask you the question, let's have a dialogue has there been mismanagement in the past? It's a yes or no, and I know you folks don't like to answer yes or no questions because I still haven't got the answer to this and I put it to you now Is Measure ABC, a new tax, yes or no?

Speaker 1:

Okay, thank you, joel, and this next question is for you, a little longer question, but hopefully you can get this out. The district is facing some real financial challenges due to declining enrollment and the methods that the state uses to fund districts like Burbank. In addition, there was an accounting error that caused the Board of Education to bring in a forensic accountant to provide guidance in the areas of business and financial management. A report that was presented to the board and the community at large made over 30 recommendations in the areas of organizational structure and internal controls. Do you believe that these issues need to be addressed in order to gain support for the bond from the voters? Can you repeat the question Basically? Let me try to summarize it for you. Because of the enrollment and what, okay. Because of the enrollment and the way the state funds the schools, okay. And then we had the $10,000. I got it. I'm sure you're.

Speaker 2:

I can't address what Mr Hill did or didn't do. I knew Mr Hill was no good and I talked about it for several years. And what did they do? They mismanaged Hill. They gave him a new contract before it expired and they gave him a raise on his new contract and then a short time later they fired him. And as far as I know, I read his contract. But as far as I know, there was some malfeasance going on. There was moral, there was possible moral turpitude going on, and I don't know if it was explored or not, but he got away with $300,000.

Speaker 2:

And that's the type of money that is serious money and could have helped our kids. And the way it's designed so often is in personnel matters. They say we can't talk about it, and they've designed it in such a way where we never get to the bottom of it. Now I don't know if you've noticed, but there is thousands of apartments being constructed here in Burbank and I can promise you that there will be some students, some children living in those apartments and the enrollment here in the district will tend to go up and we will get more money. And this is a timing manipulation, trickery, because they want to double dip. They want to get the bond money and then they're going to get the money from these new students that are coming here as well. Times change. We've been around, mr Sherwood. We know things come back around again.

Speaker 1:

Great. Thank you, andy. Are you okay with the question or do you want to repeat any part of it? That was a long question.

Speaker 3:

I'm sorry about that. It was a good question and Joel brings up many points that to me, while important, seemed a bit tangential to the actual question. And so, to try to honor this space and this process, this dialogue, I'm going to try to respond, craig, to your comments, although, joel, there's many that I would love to engage with that you just brought up, declining enrollment. It is true that California does not fund public education adequately. However, it does have a method that creates winners and losers. Um, and Burbank unified is a loser in the California uh funding model, local control funding formula. Um, the reason for that is because of our demographics. Um, we do not, um have the um very high net worth, uh, um, individuals and uh and demographics that you might see in some neighboring districts. Nor do we have the poverty or the percentage of students who meet low income criteria by federal guidelines, and so, as board member Iconian says, we are perfectly middle class and because of that we do not receive the same funding as, say, our neighboring district in Glendale that receives nearly 20 percent more per child than Burbank Unified. If you look at LA Unified, they receive nearly 60% more funding per child. And now what really compounds the problem is when you face declining enrollment.

Speaker 3:

Part of the study that, joel, you mentioned that Perkins Eastman was a facility master plan that included an enrollment analysis. They worked directly with the city of Burbank. I've actually had multiple calls I just had one about two weeks ago on the major development plans in the city and they took into account the development, both those which are permitted, those in the permitting process and those according to the master plan for the city. And what they project is that by 2032, we will still have approximately 15% enrollment decline from where we are today, even accounting for that development. If the development does not come through in the amount that we anticipate, then that enrollment decline will be more precipitous and with that goes significant state funding.

Speaker 1:

Okay, joel, you have one minute to respond.

Speaker 2:

You know, Mr Cantwell, when I have less income, when I have less money, I spend less and I run a smaller operation. Maybe I can't afford an extra car I have to cut back and that's what you and your administration is unwilling to do. If you have shrinking enrollment I think at one of your schools you only have 300 students why don't you close the district headquarters, sell it and move over to that empty school? Or why don't you consider, uh, running a smaller district with less schools and less employees? Because this is what regular folks do. We have to cut back. But this administration, including the five board members well, four, because one quit in the middle of who knows what are lost. They're unwilling to change their business model. And you have to spend less when you have less. It's called living within your means. There's no exceptions.

Speaker 1:

You can't keep coming to us for money, so we've got to stop you right there. That's your one minute. Andy, go ahead. You've got your one minute.

Speaker 3:

Yeah, I've been a school administrator for more than a decade now. I am tremendously honored at the opportunity to serve in our local schools. The toughest day of the year for me is March 15th. That's the day in which we need to notify teachers that they may be at risk of losing a job. And this past year was one of the toughest of my decade plus career because we did lay off many teachers.

Speaker 3:

We eliminated 29 full-time equivalent positions in the teacher workforce. That meant that we had uh many teachers who worked for us last year who were not able to return to us this year. Now, fortunately, we were able to eliminate a number of the positions through attrition, and so we just uh didn't hire back those who retired or resigned for uh. Unfortunately, some of those resigned to go to other school districts that pay better, um, but we were able to mitigate some of those uh reductions through attrition. And others were the most difficult conversations that we have as administrators having to let a teacher who's tirelessly poured into their classroom, into their students, into this community. You know that we just can't afford to keep them. So the idea that we are not having those conversations or the idea that we are not living within our means is just patently false, and it is difficult to hear, when I've already explained this to you, joel, on the phone, that we had a workforce reduction this past year that far exceeded what was necessary, simply due to declining enrollment.

Speaker 1:

Okay, and that's the time right there. Let me get to our next question, and Andy, you're first, and this will be a much shorter question. Okay, what will happen if the campaign for the bond fails? What should we do next for our facilities, which is a lot shorter.

Speaker 3:

That is a short question but obviously a tremendously important one. You know California has identified three funding mechanisms for school facilities. The first one is through developer fees or growth dollars. This is when a new apartment building comes into the community and a developer pays a development fee to the school district to help the district be able to have facility space available for the kids that may come through that development. That brings into the district right now roughly a million dollars a year, and those funds have significant limitations around the way they can be used. They only can be used at school sites that have growth.

Speaker 3:

The second means of funding school facilities is through state aid and, as we already discussed, burbank is eligible for state aid nearly $40 million. However, it's only eligible if we have a local match. The third means that California legislatures have set up to support the funding of school capital projects is through the issuance of bonds, and so we are hopeful that Measure ABC will pass this year. If it doesn't, I think what we're gonna have to do is look really hard within ourselves to identify where we have the disconnect with the community, and we're gonna have to listen better to the community to know how, in 2026, we'd go back out to seek their support. But there's no way around the reality that California funds school facilities through local ballot measures.

Speaker 1:

Okay, thank you, Joel. You've got two minutes.

Speaker 2:

Yeah, you know, mr Cantwell, we've got buildings coming up now being developed here in Burbank, being built as we speak, that are in the hundreds of thousands of square feet and represent a huge amount of potential income for our kids. It was me who suggested you hire somebody who knows how to count, because when the developer comes to you and says, you know he doesn't want to count the hallways, he doesn't want to count the storage room, he doesn't want to count the gymnasium, you know you've got to know how to count and get your money that you're entitled to. And you did not listen to me on that idea. Now some people say Sloshman, he goes to the podium. All he does is complain Wrong. In the five minutes that I have at the podium I cannot begin to say what needs to be said. And this current group of people have worked to eliminate public comment. You eliminated a whole period of public comment and nobody said anything.

Speaker 2:

Now I've given you dozens not only you Hill, debbie Cook, karamo. I've met with you folks and given you dozens of ideas to raise funds. So for you to come here and say that this is your only way is very disingenuous. The ideas that I've put forward are valid ideas, easy ideas to raise funds for our students. I've suggested do things differently. For example, film LA. You're giving away the bulk of the money to film LA. We can handle that. Our facilities are in demand. So don't tell me I haven't that this is the only way. There's a lot of other ways to raise money and I hope this thing fails and let's explore some of those other ideas together. I'm at your service to help you.

Speaker 3:

Andy, you have one minute to respond. Joel, I know that you desire to be of service to this community, and so I appreciate you willing to make yourself available Again. I am confident that this community supports public education. They support the magic that takes place in our classrooms.

Speaker 3:

You referenced earlier that teachers only give students one minute of attention. I don't know what district you visited, but it was not Burbank. That is not the case with our teachers, and so I am confident, and I am hopeful, that we will see Measure ABC pass next month and that this entire community is going to be able to take great pride not just in what's taking place in the classrooms, but in the actual learning spaces, the learning environments that our students enter into every day, and so, if it does not, we are going to be listening to the community to understand how we better meet those needs. But right now, my focus is on the reality that this community has shown tremendous support for Burbank Unified, and I trust that this community, with understanding what's at stake, is going to continue to support public education.

Speaker 1:

Okay, joel, you have here one minute to respond.

Speaker 2:

Mr Cantwell, it's simple math. If you have a 45-minute period and 30 kids, it's a little over a minute per kid. That's how much individualized attention you get. I'm saying there's a better way to do it. You want to stick your head in the sand and not be willing to change. That's fine.

Speaker 2:

Look what happened to the taxi industry. A better way come along Uber and Lyft, and now we don't have the dirty, smelly taxis old police cars, that type of thing. A better way came along, and now we don't have the dirty, smelly taxis, old police cars, that type of thing. A better way came along, and you know, look at Kodak cameras. Most people don't even know what film is anymore. A better way came along Rotary dial phones. A better way came along and we adapted. And AI as a form of teaching is here, and that's what we should be embracing. You can't even get your hands around a. And AI as a form of teaching is here, and that's what we should be embracing. You can't even get your hands around a cell phone policy. You're waiting for the state of California to mandate it.

Speaker 1:

And that's something we've been asking you for for years. Okay, moving on now. Next, joel, you're going to start off on this one. Should the bond campaign be successful, the Board of Education is required by law to appoint an independent citizens oversight committee to ensure that the funds are being spent on projects that are listed in the bond text. What do you think the process should be used to appoint these committee members in this important capacity?

Speaker 2:

Well, look, this whole line, Mr Sherwood, is a shim-sham. If they get the money, they may, they'll do what they want with it and they'll figure out ways to do it. For example, they say it can't be used for salaries, but if they want to hire somebody to administer the bond money and create a new salary, that is allowed. So don't believe what they're telling you. And the appointments that they're going to make are people that think the way they think. That's just how it is. They're not going to appoint a guy, like you know, who disagrees with them. It's going to be people that they like up-and-comers, people who you know want to serve. And if you attended these meetings, Mr Sherwood, it's pre-functory what they do. There's little discussion.

Speaker 1:

Okay, andy, you go do there's. Little discussion. Okay, andy, you go ahead. You got two minutes.

Speaker 3:

Joel, I heard you say a moment ago that you'll be of service to this district and I think I just heard you volunteer to serve on the oversight committee, so I hope you will put your name in the application process if the bond does pass. Just to make sure the community understands what we call the SFOC, the school facility oversight committee has a really important statutory purpose, meaning that enshrined in law. The existence of an SFOC is to ensure the proper expenditure of funds. The proper expenditure of funds both in terms of ensuring that funds are not mismanaged, that we're not paying inappropriately for a certain task, as well as to ensure that those tasks are according to the bond language. And so part of their work is actually also to work with a third party, independent auditor who audits our books. They audit, they do a performance audit as well as a financial audit of the facility bond dollars.

Speaker 3:

That audit firm reports directly to the SFOC. They do not report that first to the board, they report to the SFOC and then the SFOC is responsible for providing and creating a report to the community are confident that the funds remain expended again, both on permissible uses and effectively bid, competitively bid projects. The Oversight Committee again has requirements around the minimum number of individuals who can serve on it. It's minimum five and they have to make up certain stakeholder groups. One example is a taxpayer advocacy group like Howard Jarvis, someone representing that group. Another would be a parent-teacher association and another would be an individual who is active in an organization supporting seniors. And so again, a cross-section of the community, not just an echo chamber, not just staff, but rather a true cross -section of this community that come together to ensure the proper expenditure of funds.

Speaker 1:

Okay, joel, you have one minute to respond.

Speaker 2:

Mr Cantwell, you heard wrong. I did not volunteer. I don't appreciate your humor, although I would be qualified because you know, I'm a licensed general contractor a former licensed general contractor with over 40 years of experience and I also held a real estate license at one time. I was a realtor at one time and I developed a number of properties here in Burbank and I'm proud of the quality that I built. Now let's go back to the Perkins Eastman report, which contained hundreds of pages of design standards. These are intended to use quality, approved, safety, safe materials in our buildings. So there's no work for the design review committee or whatever committee you're calling it, this bond review committee to approve that type of thing. Whatever you want to spend the money on, they're going to approve it, because when you have $458 million and your charge is to spend the money by golly, you're going to spend it.

Speaker 1:

Okay, andy, you have one minute to respond.

Speaker 3:

Joel, I'm going to hold out hope that you will consider serving the community on the committee. However, I hear you not interested in that currently. We'll see. We'll see what the next few months hold.

Speaker 3:

What I can say is that we have been fortunate to have individuals like you with incredible backgrounds, and so, while the statute, the state law, requires those five individuals I just mentioned, to my knowledge the district has never run a committee of only five individuals. We want more ideas, we want more experience, background, skill sets in that room. As we hold these public meetings, they are Brown Act agendized meetings that the entire community is welcome to attend. It sounds like you've attended in the past, although I don't believe, since I've been in the district, that I've seen you at the meetings, but they are available to the community. But we do get incredible experts in their fields, just as you expressed your background, joel, and so we're able to have people who might have a skill set beyond what an individual within the district has in a specialized niche, and they're able to help us have forethought into knowing the types of questions to ask and the answers to seek. So I hope you'll consider the committee, but I hope this community will consider the committee also.

Speaker 1:

Okay, very good, andy. This next question is going to you. As a planning tool, the Board of Education paid Perkins Eastman to prepare a needs assessment. The report is over 500 pages and provides a prioritized framework for projects that the bond can fund. The document divides the projects into three areas. They are infrastructure, learning environments and enhanced program supports. How will decisions be made to move forward with updates and improvements based on this framework? Is one area more important than another?

Speaker 3:

Yeah, craig, that study that you mentioned and that Joel has brought up a few times, perkins Eastman undertook nearly a year-long process to develop this facility master plan. Nearly a year-long process to develop this facility master plan. Multiple board meeting presentations, multiple presentations to the Administrative Affairs Governance Committee. They met with every site team, walked the sites. They really did a thorough needs assessment and, beyond just a needs assessment, looked at the types of things, joel, that you bring up of, not just what was this educational space designed to be 50 years ago when it was built, but what does it need to be going forward. And so they put forward a plan of priority needs. It totals $1.1 billion in present day dollars. If we actually use their projections for factoring in inflation, then during the period in which measure ABC bond funds would be available, it's actually about $1.6 billion of need.

Speaker 3:

So in a perfect world we would have funding sufficient to meet all of those needs. We know that we don't, and so it is going to require prioritization of projects. We are only going to fund about a third of those that have been identified as high need projects for this community. The basic priorities are going to be on safety, on ensuring the protection of the physical space, and that would be including roof repairs, it'd be accessibility, and so ensuring that our buildings, which may have met ADA compliance 40 years ago again, when they were 30 years ago, when they were last updated, are ensuring that they're coming to code now so that we have educational spaces that truly are accessible for all of our students. And so, again, when we look at safety, when we look at maintaining the physical plant, physical structure, as well as ensuring equitable access to our spaces, those are the priorities.

Speaker 1:

Okay, joel, you'll have two minutes.

Speaker 2:

Mr Cantwell, I did attend the Perkins-Eastman's meetings. I don't recall you being at every meeting, but I can tell you what Perkins Eastman's did because I attended. They went around the room and they asked the various moms what would you want? And some of them said things like well, we'd like to have a room filled with sofas and nice furniture where kids can go to decompress, and lo and behold when Perkins Eastman's comes out. That's the type of thing that is in the report.

Speaker 2:

Now, that is not a need. In my definition, that is a want, and you've confused the two things. This is a money grab. That's what this bond is. You want to cover the fact that the administration is taking the bulk of the money on a per person basis. Obviously, you're a fewer administrators than you do teachers, but you're very well paid and that's where the money goes. And when you do silly things, I give our new superintendent a $50,000 raise over.

Speaker 2:

The last guy on his first day has shown no leadership. $50,000 plus another $10,000 to do anything he wants with, as long as it's for education, for his education and I use this example If he wants to go to Hawaii and stick his feet in the sand and read a book on how to be a better manager, that qualifies to spend the $10,000. And that's the type of mismanagement this district has displayed. And when I go to the podium and ask about it, you take turns ridiculing me not you personally, the other five and you've witnessed it and you sit in silence. The last time I spoke for five minutes and it was about 13 and a half minutes of people taking turn ridiculing me, never answering the questions that I asked. And when they do answer a question, it's a question that I did not ask. There is a lack of transparency going on here.

Speaker 1:

And that's the problem for your district, Joel we got to stop there, Andy you got one minute to respond, joel.

Speaker 3:

you said many things just now, nearly all of which I disagree with. You spent a little bit over two minutes and I don't have quite that much time and I think it may require more to engage in each of those individual topics. The question, I believe, if I recall correctly, was on the Perkins-Eastman Master Plan, and so I'm going to focus my response only on that. First of all, the meeting you described I was present at. I was fortunate to serve as the district administrator on the Administrative Affairs Committee.

Speaker 3:

I find the way that you refer to it as a group of moms to be pejorative. I think that was factually inaccurate. There was a cross-section of genders as well as a cross-section of highly skilled individuals coming from a variety of perspectives. I also would never denigrate or suggest that if it were a group of moms, that they don't have highly important opinions to give us on what the educational adequacy requirements would be for a classroom. But that's not what was in the room. But that's not what was in the room. That was another example of a cross-section of this community coming together to talk about what the educational spaces need to be.

Speaker 1:

Okay, joel, you have one minute to respond.

Speaker 2:

Well, you know, that's what you folks do. When I say something general like that is you hone in and attack Right. Of course it wasn't all moms. Of course there was a cross-section of people to be respected. There were some moms there, there were some PTA participants there, so we're both correct. I'm not trying to denigrate anybody. The point of this thing is, which you want to skip over, is they wanted a room full of furniture for kids to go and sit down and that's all great, warm and fuzzy type of thing.

Speaker 2:

I'm a tough love kind of guy. I have four children. I have standards and certain expectations for my children. Kids can have a hard day. I'm sympathetic to that. But we also have to remember we're here to educate the kids and you're trying to spread yourself too thin and you're asking to do it with our wallets. You're reaching in and taking food off our table for all these things that you want to do. You talked about a safety component. Right now, specifically identify what school is not safe. Where are we putting kids that are not safe? I yield to you.

Speaker 1:

Okay, well, we can get into that later, but that's not where we're going. We have our next question now and, joel, you're going to start off with this one. This is more of a cause and effect, I guess you would call it. There are many Burbank voters that are renters. If the bond gets 55% of the votes and voters say yes to the bond, do you feel it will increase the? It will cause landlords to increase rents and the average cost to the individual homeowners, especially those on a fixed income.

Speaker 2:

Okay, it's a two-part question. I'll answer the second part first. If you are a property owner, you are going to feel this. It's going to hit you in the pocketbook, it's going to affect you. It's going to take more money from your savings or make you work more hours to cover these payments. That's a fact.

Speaker 2:

Now, the other part of your question had to do with renters, and we have a state law that caps the amount of rent that a property owner can pass on to a renter. And that's really, really problematic if you own rental units in Burbank and are providing that service, because there's no limit on what Home Depot can charge for a water heater, there's no limit on what labor is to install that water heater. And this is just an example. If you need a roof, which could be, or you have a gardener or whatever it is, your costs are escalating. But the state has capped your rents.

Speaker 2:

So this is going to decimate property owners. They know it. Now, if you have a mom and pop who's been relaxed and hasn't raised your rent in a few years, they're going to be forced to do it because our water rates are doubling and tripling. If you have, you got a water bill or an electric bill lately. Same type of thing. I said you have two minutes or one minute you have two minutes, two minutes, thank you, so you know you're no different from us, mr Sherwood.

Speaker 2:

You feel it, you see it in the utility bills, and property owners have to pass this on to the tenants. So the answer is yes, to the extent that they can. But you know it's going to drive them into bankruptcy too. And if you are a merchant here doing business, your costs are going to increase, and if you have a triple net lease, these costs are passed on to you. So you know it's bad for everybody, it's not just one or two groups of people, it's. It hurts everybody, and it hurts the people who can least afford pay it okay, and've got two minutes.

Speaker 3:

Craig, I'm the numbers guy for the district and I'm told that usually when I start talking, eyes glaze over because people don't always enjoy hearing the numbers, and so I appreciate that we've had a robust conversation for more than a half hour before we've actually really dived into what the numbers are, but I think this is the right question to do that. In 2013, this community supported measure S uh. That uh allowed for a um assessed tax rate of $55 and 18 cents per a hundred thousand dollars of valuation of property. What the board has done with measure ABC is ask the community to recommit to that same assessment that's already in place. The 1997 bonds will soon be paid off and so, as we have more of that tax rate paying off 2013, what the school board has done is ask for the community to recommit, extend the current existing tax rate. We're not talking about adding to that rate, it's returning it to the 2013 rate of $55.18. And so let's also make sure we understand assessed valuation, because that can be a tricky concept.

Speaker 3:

California property tax assessed valuation is capped based on primarily the fair market value at the time of acquisition. So if I purchased my house 20 years ago for half a million dollars, that home in Burbank today is probably close to $1.5 million, but the actual assessed valuation is going to be somewhere in the ballpark of $700,000. So, again, a home that actually has a fair market value of $1.5 million has an assessed valuation of $700,000. Currently, a property owner under that situation would be paying about $350 a year to support our local schools. The only taxes that go directly toward local schools is, in the immediate term, potentially raise it by about $40 to bring us to that 55-18 rate and hold it steady into the future. And so, again, what we're talking about is a rate extension that's been in place since 2013.

Speaker 1:

Okay, Julie, you have one minute to respond. Well, boy.

Speaker 2:

there's a lot to respond there, Mr Sherwood. First of all, 39% of the state's budget was to education. That's indisputable. Whether we're getting our fair shake or not is another conversation. That's not what this is about. We pay taxes. I'm happy to pay my taxes, but I don't want to pay them over and over again. When I've already paid them one time, there has to be something left for me to save and pass on to my children. I think about these things and I think about what I could do with the money that you're taking from me, because I could take that money and invest it and I will hopefully get some return and I will have more to give. I care about these things because I have children with special needs and they are going to need care in the future. Maybe that's part of why I'm so passionate about this, because I want people to be able to help their children. I'm sending two kids into college right now and I'm paying for it because I don't want to burden them with the debt of college.

Speaker 1:

Now, Joel, that's your one minute. Andy, you have one minute to respond.

Speaker 3:

Well, Joel, I think that you just mentioned something that you have mentioned previously to me as well your pride in your children, and you've mentioned many times that their products at Burbank Unified.

Speaker 3:

I am happy for you, for their successes, and really, what we're trying to say is that the incredible academic rigor and quality of education that they received over the past couple of decades is what we desire for this community to all be beneficiaries of not just those who have the financial resources to pass inheritance to their children, but anyone who's fortunate enough to be able to have their children in this community that they can have an exemplary education. I talked about this when I gave my introduction, that public education is the single greatest way in which we can better a community. It's a single grace way to provide financial mobility to uh? Um individuals, and so, uh, what we're asking for is the community support to allow us to be able to ensure that we have? Uh school facilities that do not have re? Uh leaking roofs, that do not have malfunctioning air conditioning, that do not have utilities that were installed in the forties uh, but rather have academic spaces appropriate for the instruction.

Speaker 1:

Okay, that's your one minute. Okay, let's move on. Okay, so, andy, it goes to you first. How are deferred maintenance dollars generated to make needed repairs? Do they come from the general fund dollars? And, if so, would not having these bond dollars affect the educational programs in our schools?

Speaker 3:

that's a really good question as well. Craig, I know you've done your homework or you talked to some good people who understand the various funds for education.

Speaker 3:

So we talk often about a general fund in education accounting speak, that's fund one. That is the $220 million budget that you referenced a few moments ago, joel. We also have a separate fund that the state requires us to maintain, called a deferred maintenance fund. That's our fund 14. So anyone who is really interested in numbers, I encourage you to go to our September 5th board meeting where we presented our unaudited actuals, that's the year-end financial statement for our year-end ending on June 30 of 24, prior to it going to the auditors for a final audit. You would there see that fund 14 did not receive any revenue this year and that our remaining balance is about $200,000. And so total funding that we have available for deferred maintenance just under a quarter million, with no funding source. Previously it was required that there be a contribution coming from the general fund. The state changed that law a few years ago and so there is no funding mechanism to uh to um maintain that deferred maintenance fund okay, joel, you have two minutes.

Speaker 1:

Yeah, just to quickly respond.

Speaker 2:

Don't put words in my mouth because my children did not receive an exemplary education. Okay, that's a fact. And if you look at the pesky state testing that we, the state asks of us to measure how our kids are doing, all of our kids, except the parents, except certain kids, are failing. They have a less than 50% pass rate across all metrics. So don't say that you're giving out exemplary educations. You're not. You're paying your teachers like they should be, but there's no correlation between how our kids do in grades and how the teachers get paid. Can you imagine having a job where your performance has nothing to do with your pay? That's what we have right now, essentially. So that's one thing.

Speaker 2:

You never answered this question. This is the third time I've asked you this question and the people watching this, mr Cantwell, are smarter than this. You can sing and dance skirt the question, but this question needs to be answered someday somehow. Is Measure ABC, a new tax, yes or no? No? And the real problem in all of this, all the time we're spending, mr sherwood, goes down to accountability and transparency.

Speaker 2:

Why won't you answer this yes or no question and answer the question? I forgot what the first part was, but deferred maintenance deferred maintenance.

Speaker 2:

Deferred maintenance Okay, you know. Look, what you should do is take a percentage of your budget, of your general fund, and say we're going to dedicate, let's say, 10%. That's what you should do. Instead, you gave it all away to the unions for salaries you included. So that's the problem we have here is a weak administration who doesn't have foresight to say, hey, let's put aside a portion of our pie, a portion of our money for the future. We know things are going to need to be repaired. Stop coming to us and asking us to bail you out for your poor decisions. That's all this is.

Speaker 1:

Okay, andy, you've got two minutes to respond. Are you excited to question okay, andy, you've got two minutes to respond or your side of the question?

Speaker 3:

um, well again, a lot, a lot that you just gave me to think about, joel. Uh, very little of it. Regarding deferred maintenance, um, I think, though, at the core, what I I'd like to respond to is, um, the I'll answer that question before my minutes's up but you said some pretty offensive things yet again about our teacher workforce. I do believe that we are providing an exceptional education. The percentages that you just quoted are completely incorrect. We have consistently high achievement in this district.

Speaker 3:

I actually recently received a letter to the paper in Pastina, where they are going for a parcel tax, and actually what the newspaper article said was look at our neighbors in Burbank. They're able to have twice the academic success on half the revenue. It was a little bit of an exaggeration the way they worded it. On half the revenue. It was a little bit of an exaggeration the way they worded it, but it was nonetheless appreciated that they acknowledged just how strong and successful our district is able to be when our funding is one of the lowest in the county.

Speaker 3:

88 school districts in the county you're just looking at on a per pupil basis, we're in the bottom 10%, bottom 10% in LA County for school funding. Now, if you add on top of that, if you look at our bond measure, the rate that is going to be asked for the community to support yet again an extension of an existing rate is the seventh lowest out of 48 school districts unified districts that have bonds currently in place. So we're in the bottom 10% for overall funding per pupil. We're in the bottom 15% for communities in LA County that have a bond a facility bond on the actual tax rate being assessed on homeowners.

Speaker 1:

Okay, joel, you have one minute to respond, mr.

Speaker 2:

Cantwell, forgive me but I'm not going to believe what you say. I'm going to go by what I read in the disclosure, in the sample ballot and the educational things. Here's my tax bill, and my tax bill has a tax rate of 0.436. It's roughly about $44 per $100,000. According to the documents, it's going to increase to $55. Now that's a huge difference. It's like 25 increase to $55. Now that's a huge difference. It's like 25%, 30% increase. So stop saying that our taxes aren't going up. Our taxes in black and white are going up. Now you can spin, say we don't know the future and all these types of things, but I'm going by what's in black and white and it's going to go for me and this is the same rate for everybody, from $44 to $55. And when you times that times 30 years, it becomes a huge amount of money and it's something that all of us should be concerned with. The district wants to gloss over it and I still haven't got that yes or no answer which you promised.

Speaker 1:

Okay, andy, you have one minute to finish here.

Speaker 3:

Joel I'm not sure how much more direct I can be what we are asking the community to support on November 5th, or for those who've already received their mail-in ballots I see, joel, you have your I voted sticker, so those ballots, if you've not yet received them, should be in the mail any day this week.

Speaker 3:

We are asking the community to step up for education and to approve an extension of the rate that was approved in 2013. Now we take seriously the responsibility to steward these taxpayer dollars well, and so, even though the community supported the $55.18 rate, we have only had one year in which we were even close to that rate. Every other year since 2013, we have been able to stay well below even $50. The average, I believe, has been right about $49 over the past 11 years. One of the ways we were able to do that was because we refinanced some of our debt in 2020. To do that was because we refinanced some of our debt in 2020. It was before I came to the district that was expert leadership of the district administration at the time to refinance when we had rates so low and we were able to save taxpayer dollars, and so an independent analysis and including the ballot materials, is that this will have an average annual cost of $41 below the current rate that you are experiencing. $41 will be the average cost over the life of the bond.

Speaker 1:

Okay, we're getting it up there. Last question yes, we've gotten to that point. Finally, we get to the last question here and, joel, you can start off with this. Appendix C on the bond text states that the best estimate of the total debt service that would be required to be paid is over $1 billion. Do you know how this estimate was created? And it would probably not be paid off until 2060. So your comments towards that?

Speaker 2:

Yeah, well, it's scary because I'm not going to be alive, but my children will be and I don't want to burden them with this debt and it is scary to me to make everything in Burbank more expensive for them to service this debt. In its most simplistic terms, if it's $1.1 billion and we have 110,000 citizens, that's $10,000 for every citizen. But if you have a mom and a dad and a few kids, that's $40,000. Now this money, mr Sherwood, has to come from somewhere. It has to be paid back and it's gonna. So the answer to this thing is vote no. And then you send a message to the school district to live within your mean and some of these things that I've talked about earlier of putting a percentage aside for the facilities. It forces them to do that. They are not to be believed because they told us at the last parcel tax there's no money for raises. And then they got three raises and it's the same type of thing. Money will come.

Speaker 2:

But to respond to Mr Cantwell, you know these numbers that you're are are projecting, are predicated on rosy outlooks, and I've been in the real estate business I've been in, you know, paying attention to things for decades and I can tell you things don't always go up, they go down, and you've already we know you're going to sell the four hundred and fifty eight million dollars in bonds that has to be paid.

Speaker 2:

And what you're not telling the people is, if your home value goes down, you're going to be paying more and you're telling people hey, your home values are going to keep going up forever. Let's have this rosy picture and that's just not how it is. And, by the way, mr Cantwell, us folks at home we've got air conditioners that need to be fixed from time to time and roofs that need to be fixed from time to time, and when my roof leaks, I go up there with some mastic and I fix it, and if my air conditioner breaks, I repair it, and that's just how it is. You have to plan for the future and this school district is not to be trusted and hasn't planned for the future. He gave it all the way to the unions and that's what these documents prove, andy, you've got your two minutes.

Speaker 3:

Yeah, so the question was regarding the need to pay back the debt, the length of time and some of the underlying assumptions. I believe it is true that what the intent would be would be a 30-year term on these bonds, and so if the final bond were sold in 2030, that's how we arrive at the 2060 end date. That's correct. The third party that created the actuarial assumptions on the debt payment assumed an annual increase in assessed valuation of 3.5%. If you look at the past decade, this community has actually been very fortunate to experience an annual year-over-year increase just below 5% on assessed valuation, and so a very conservative rate was used. If we find that, as in years as the past decade, that we have increased assessed valuation that is close to that 5%, then the assessed rate proportionally goes down, and so, again, as home assessed values go up, that assessed valuation will go far below the $41 that is in the campaign literature the campaign literature as far as the need to be proactive and then the need to respond to the needs that we've already identified.

Speaker 3:

Last year, we had significant rains.

Speaker 3:

I'm sure many of you remember some of those days where we had absences in excess of 20% of students because families were feeling like they need to keep their children home. We had 99 roof leaks at one point, 99 failures of our envelope staying secure, and what that means is that we have students, some as young as four years old, in TK classes who were being taught in rooms that have roofs leaking, windows that are not properly sealed and water and moisture coming in. We have an incredible team of dedicated staff who were up there in those rains, who were clearing the causes of blockages that would cause the water to back back up. We had a third party that came around and repaired a number of those spots of failure, but the reality is that when you have a 30-year-old roof, you only can band-aid it for so long before you need to reinvest in a new one, and so we're at that point where we need to invest in new roofs and much of the rest of our infrastructure. It's now is time that we're asking the community support. That's your time.

Speaker 1:

Joel, you'll have one minute to respond.

Speaker 2:

You know, mr Cantwell, I heard what you just said. I wonder if you heard what you just said, because if you have roof leaks, you talked about blockages. Well, we don't need a new roof for a blockage of a drain. You go up on the roof and you clear the blockage and you think about it in advance. You got to plan for this, you know, to keep your pumps clear and your drains clear, otherwise you're going to have problems. And it sounds from what you just said, that's some of what we had.

Speaker 2:

Now this bond is really, really problematic for us, you know, and you're not going to be paying for it. You're going to drive home to wherever you're from Valencia maybe and leave us to deal with this for 30 years, and you're not going to be paying for it. You're going to drive home to wherever you're from Valencia, maybe and leave us to deal with this for 30 years and leave our children to deal with it for 30 years. And that's who's going to be paying this thing, suffering from this thing, because you folks haven't planned. It's so simple. You've taken all the money for yourselves. You've kind of looted us from the inside because you can. You folks have the power to make the decisions on what the money is, and I've never heard our five school board members disagree with you. They are essentially human rubber stamps. Whatever you put before them, they rubber stamp without discussion in many times and you're spending great sums of money.

Speaker 2:

Here's a letter that somebody sent me. It's, I assume it's, an anonymous letter from one of your employees and they're they're complaining that you're buying new furniture at district headquarters, and it's the second or third letter I've gotten on this topic. And they're saying that you're using district funds to pay for PTA meals. And they sent me the actual document using district funds to pay for PTA meals. And they sent me the actual document where you did do just that pay for PTA meals. And this is problematic. When you're spending my money, my sacred tax dollars are not being used properly, and I'll just leave it at that If you're comfortable with what's going on. More power to you, mr Cantwell. I'm not, and I'll say it to you in a tone that's disagreeable. That's just the way it's going to be.

Speaker 1:

Okay, Real quickly. You went way over your time. I'm going to give you 30 seconds if you want to respond to anything before we move on.

Speaker 3:

That's okay. Thank you, Craig.

Speaker 1:

Okay, that's the end of our questions. I really appreciate both you coming in. I know it's a little bit contentious at times. Um, I think it's really good to get the full opinions out there that everybody can, you know, see that now your ballots should be getting your ballots either today or this week. So I think it's very important that you understand the issues here and I appreciate both of you coming in and respectfully listening to each other and talking this over. We're going to finish up by giving each side three minutes to state their case. So, joel, you are going to go first and here's your camera right here, as you know, and you have three minutes to state your case, mr.

Speaker 2:

Sherwood, thank. You have three minutes to state your case, mr Sherwood. Thank you for hosting this Once again. Mr Cantwell, I always like your company and you know that I respect you. This is a big deal. It really is, and there are ramifications that I've talked about, how it hurts every individual, particularly children and people on fixed incomes, people who can't go out and work and get more money to make up for this. I want some accountability from you folks and that's not what I've heard and that's what people tell me, that they may support a bond, but not with the makeup of this council and the way I'm treated by Weisberg and Ferguson. You know you just make things up about me when you don't want to talk about the facts, you just go on the attack mode and that's not the way to resolve things and get things done. And people see it. So I read the papers and I look around and I see, you know, lacs and increase in homeless families and agencies are struggling to help. Now what does that have to do with us? Well, when you make things more expensive for people and they have to survive, they get desperate and they turn a lot of times sometimes to crime. And if you would ask the police chief if you know financial dire financial times increase. You know you see crime rates increase. I think he'll tell you they do, and that's what you're doing here. There's, you know you have the potential of more homelessness. It will, that's a fact. It will create more homelessness. I should have asked you that directly. But that's the type of things, the consequences of what happens down the line.

Speaker 2:

All of us support our school. It's not what this is about. We support our schools. We want to work for better school. This is about management and the decisions that you make and that you're a part of. Now you said it yourself. You've only been here a short time, but we've got people that have been here, you know over 12 years, and just make the same mistakes over and over again. So I had asked you about DEI and how much money you spent on DEI, and this is what you sent me $750,000. Now I'm not picking on DEI and this is what you sent me $750,000. Now I'm not picking on DEI. This is a decision that you chose to make to spend $750,000. And it's really an indictment on our teaching staff to say that they need DEI training.

Speaker 2:

I think we have good people. I don't think we have discriminatory people working for us, and if we discover any, they should be fired. But how many roof leaks could you fix with $750,000? How many air conditioners could you repair with $750,000? And these are the questions that people think about. The time for change is now and if this thing fails, I hope you'll take it as a mandate to do things differently. You're going to have to run a smaller district and, yeah, people are going to lose their jobs. That's a function of business. It's not personal relationships with the unions like we have now. People are going to lose their jobs. They'll get a job someplace else. Life goes on.

Speaker 1:

Okay, joel, that's your three minutes. Thank you very much, andy, as you know where your camera is also, and I know your three minutes to make your case on the yes side.

Speaker 3:

Great Well. Craig, again, thank you very much for creating this venue for Joel and I to have a spirited discussion. Joel, again I thank you for your passion and for your ability to convey your thoughts. I began sharing my background Again.

Speaker 3:

I've worked in three different counties in California in public education. What I've found is that just about anywhere you go, they think they're special. Each local community has something that they feel makes them special. I'd actually say and I hesitate to say this because I don't want any of my former districts to hear it Burbank actually is special. I'm from Moorpark, a community that really sprung up in the 80s, and so there's not many second-generation or third-generation families in the public school system. I've been blown away at just how many I've found here in Burbank of people who not only have their children in the district but whose parents also attended the same schools in which they now have, uh have the third or fourth generation. Um, you know, the uh thing that I realized pretty quickly coming in Burbank is that it is the uh biggest little town that I've ever been a part of. Um, there's so that intersect in ways familial and just really again create a character to a community that makes us a joy to work and serve in.

Speaker 3:

We are at the point in our schools where, again, for many of them, because of the generational attendance that we've had, they're 80, 90, 100 years old. Buildings require not just basic maintenance, which we are responsible for, but for significant replacement of systems and reconstruction when they reach this age, and so we are asking the community to please support our local schools with supporting Measure ABC over this next month. Again, you're right, joel, that there are many different ways that folks in this community pay taxes, but this is the only method of taxes that go directly locally and must stay local to support our schools. We have over 14,000 children in this community who attend a Burbank Unified School every day. Whether that number declines in the manner in which I mentioned earlier or we're able to remain steady, we know that we have a responsibility every day to provide the best environment for our children to succeed, and that does require safety.

Speaker 3:

Our campuses must be secure to provide the best environment for our children to succeed, and that does require safety. Our campuses must be secure. They must have the 2024 and beyond level safety measures. Beyond that, they need to have proper climate control. They need to have proper roofs that are functioning. We need to have utility systems that are not from the 40s, with cloth fiber that we had at Luther recently one fail and lost a wing of classrooms for a week last school year. We are at the point where it's not just band-aiding our facilities but we really need and we desire. We ask this community to partner with us, support the ability to provide facilities that are indicative of the investment this community has in our local schools. Thank you.

Speaker 1:

All right, well, thank you both. This is a tough subject, you know. I think it's important. Number one when you get your ballot, it's important that you vote. It's also important you read read about the measure ABC. Hopefully this will help you decipher a little bit and form your opinion. But you need to vote. Can't say that enough. Turnout is important, especially at a minute easy in California where you just check out your your ballot and you put it back in the mail again. Really not a reason that you cannot vote. So, please, it's important that you vote. Frank Schur from MyBurbank. Thank you very much for watching or listening on the podcast platforms and we will see you next time.