After a pitched battle that exposed a deep rift in management philosophy, the Los Angeles school board took a budget ax to the district鈥檚 regional administrative zones last week.
At a packed meeting, and with members of the local teachers鈥� union protesting outside, the board voted 5-2 on June 8 to reduce the number of 鈥渓ocal districts鈥� from 11 to eight. The size of the staff in each district office could shrink from more than 100 employees to fewer than 60.
The plan marks a compromise offered by Superintendent Roy Romer, who had wanted to preserve all of the district offices, which he argues play an important role in driving instructional improvement. United Teachers Los Angeles, which helped elect a majority of the school board鈥檚 members, had called for the virtual elimination of the regional offices, which union leaders describe as a 鈥渂loated bureaucracy.鈥�
鈥淭his will save money and make us leaner and more focused,鈥� Mr. Romer said in a statement after last week鈥檚 vote.
Despite the accord, the months-long debate leading up to it revealed a split in thinking among top leaders about central elements of the strategy for raising achievement in the 746,000-student Los Angeles Unified system. Criticism of the local districts focused not just on their expense, but also on their function.
鈥淭he original purpose of the mini-districts was to give parents and community members better access to this administrative structure,鈥� board member Jon Lauritzen said in an interview. 鈥淏ut under Superintendent Romer, we have gone the other way, and all the policies and instructional pedagogy are being directed from top down, and the local schools have very little input.鈥�
Expected to save $24 million, the consolidation is one of scores of cost-cutting measures undertaken by the Los Angeles school board in recent months as it has sought to close a $500 million gap in the district鈥檚 $5.7 billion budget. About 500 non-teaching positions were eliminated earlier this spring, but none of the previous cuts prompted as much debate as last week鈥檚 changes to the local districts.
Union Sees 鈥楩at Cats鈥�
The 11-region configuration dates back to 2000, when then-interim Superintendent Ramon Cortines created it as a way to bring administrative services closer to the school level. Each regional office includes its own superintendent, school supervisors, and curriculum specialists, along with support-staff members.
Rowena Lagrosa, the superintendent of local District H in eastern Los Angeles, argues that the structure has been a big improvement over the previous model, in which the school system was divided into 27 鈥渃lusters,鈥� each with an office housing just a handful of administrators. The cluster offices, in which Ms. Lagrosa served as a leader, could support only superficial efforts to improve instruction, she said.
鈥淲e鈥檙e directing the delivery of professional development, not just in one or two shots, but by going into the schools on an ongoing basis,鈥� said Ms. Lagrosa, referring to the current arrangement.
Mr. Romer credits such guidance, along with other changes, for the district鈥檚 success in raising student performance at the elementary level, which has outpaced statewide improvement rates in recent years.
A former Colorado governor, he notes that with about 70,000 students, each of the 11 local districts has served about as many students as the Denver school system. (Under the consolidation plan, that number will grow to about 95,000.)
鈥淭his whole issue for us is what kind of expertise, what kind of specialists do we need in the subject- matter content areas that will help a very, very large district change its practice,鈥� the superintendent said in an interview.
Critics, however, see the local districts as administration run amok. They balked when Mr. Romer first suggested keeping all 11 of them鈥攁lthough he did propose trimming their budgets鈥攁t a time when schools have had to absorb cuts in money for classroom supplies and other resources.
John Perez, the president of United Teachers Los Angeles, calls the local-district administrators 鈥渇at cats鈥� and 鈥減rinces.鈥� Their efforts to monitor instruction through a process called 鈥渓earning walks,鈥� he contends, are intrusive and counterproductive.
鈥淭he superintendent thinks he cannot run the district without an army of bureaucrats,鈥� said Mr. Perez. 鈥淭he mini-districts don鈥檛 do anything to improve instruction at the classroom level. If anything, they hinder it.鈥�
A 鈥楶recarious Place鈥�
With the school board under the gun to reduce more spending, the union mobilized its members in an all-out campaign against the local districts. In multiple demonstrations, the message was: Cut the bureaucracy first, not the classroom. The union is affiliated with both the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association.
It was after some board members proposed having as few as four local districts鈥攚hich would have more than doubled the number of students in each one鈥攖hat Mr. Romer came up with his compromise plan for eight regions. Union leaders said last week they could live with the deal.
Despite the cuts, the superintendent said the new structure includes some improvements. While reducing the overall size of the staff in each district office, it boosts the number of specialists to support instruction in science and social studies. It also gives each office a parent ombudsman, a new position proposed by board members.
But as the dust settled last week, board member Marlene Canter said she fears that the episode bodes ill for the future. The flare-up was the biggest since a slate of union-supported board members formed a new majority on the school board, bringing with it a different mind-set than that of the board that hired Mr. Romer four year ago.
鈥淲e鈥檙e at a very precarious place right now in terms of leadership,鈥� said Ms. Canter, who voted against the consolidation.
