San Mateo County: Jerry Hill pushes -- then postpones -- education commission San Mateo County: Jerry Hill pushes -- then postpones -- education commission (August 17, 2005)

By Marion Softky

Almanac Staff Writer

A last-minute proposal by Supervisor Jerry Hill to create a new San Mateo County Education Commission and put it to voters in November raised so many questions -- particularly in the education community that would make up the commission -- that he postponed it after one week.

Mr. Hill first presented his proposal for a San Mateo County Education Commission in a memo August 5 for discussion by the Board of Supervisors August 9, with a request that the board act by August 16 to put it on the ballot.

The proposed Education Commission would allow San Mateo County's 20 cities, 24 school districts, three community colleges, and boards of education and supervisors to forge a common approach to influencing decisions in Washington and Sacramento, which are increasingly threatening school funding, Supervisor Hill said.

"We need to speak with one voice in Sacramento and Washington because that's where decisions are made," he said. "Class size reductions are threatened. Teacher protections are under attack. School employees face an uncertain future. Our children's education suffers."

Last Tuesday, the board cast a preliminary 3-2 vote to put the measure on the ballot and planned to take final action this week. Supervisors Rich Gordon and Mark Church voted no; they cited the haste, and the lack of detail as to how the commission would work, who would serve on it, and how it would be financed.

"It seems to me to be rushing it," Supervisor Gordon said; he suggested aiming for primary election next June. "Having served on the County Board of Education, I feel strongly we need to take more time to move forward."

Calling the proposal a "good idea," Supervisor Church asked what the costs would be. "We need input from the educational community," he said. "We need information before we vote."
Educators respond

Mr. Church was right. Many education leaders learned about the proposed commission only after the board's action Tuesday. They were confused and said they needed more information to make substantial comments.

"I don't know why we're rushing it so quickly," said Pat Gemma, superintendent of the Sequoia Union High School District. "Why don't we wait until the next election?"

Mary Ann Somerville, superintendent of the Las Lomitas School District, noted there are already voices representing education in Sacramento and Washington.

"My gut says we don't need something like that," she said. "It's very difficult for any group to represent all of education because we all have various issues and concerns."

Supervisor Hill issued a press release last Friday postponing his proposal. He acknowledged there were too many questions about the commission and its membership to work out by the next meeting. "With the short time frame, we could not develop the language for the ballot," he wrote.

However, Mr. Hill promised to continue pushing his proposal to create a commission that will advocate for better education in local schools. "The urgency continues to exist," he wrote. "A year in the life of a school-aged child is formative and crucial."

E-mail a friend a link to this story.