LAUSD REFORM IS A BITTER BATTLE: As key vote nears, some complain competition to run schools is rife with favoritism.

By Connie Llanos, Staff Writer | LA Daily News

1 Feb 2009 -- Los Angeles Unified parents, teachers and community members will get to vote on their favorite school proposals this week as the district inches closer to launching a landmark reform plan handing over control of some schools to the best bidders.

But what was supposed to be a healthy competition has turned into a heated battle between district employee unions, charter school operators and other nonprofits that are vying for control of 36 district schools.

Applicants accuse each other of foul play and the only thing all can agree on is that the voting process leaves too much room for voter violations.

LAUSD Superintendent Ramon Cortines has had to play referee, reminding district employees that they must act with "integrity."

"There have been reports of aggressive advocacy by individuals and organizations which in turn have led to marked intimidation and abuses of the democratic process," Cortines wrote in a letter to district staff.

"This is not a popularity contest nor is it a circus."

The advisory vote that begins Tuesday is one of the final steps of the School Choice plan approved by the Board of Education in August that gives control of 36 new and underperforming schools to applicants who present the best plans as judged by the school board.

The votes are only meant to help shape the final recommendation by Cortines and the final decision of the school board on Feb. 23. However, many see them as an important element in the reform effort, symbolizing a shift in the culture of the nation's second-largest school district.

"This is historic ... nothing like this has ever happened before at this district," said LAUSD board member Yolie Flores, who authored the reform plan.

"We are telling parents that what they want matters. Is there room for improvement? Yes. ... and I'm very disappointed that some have chosen to abuse the process, but it's still important for people to participate."

Still, in most cases informational meetings have drawn more teachers and local educators than parents and students. The few parents who did attend felt that adult concerns such as teacher job security were discussed more than ways to improve children's education.

"I thought this meeting was supposed to be about what they want to do for my child at this school next year," said Natalia Cruz, a mother of a seventh-grader at San Fernando Middle School, at a recent meeting at the school.

"All I heard about was what was going to happen to the teachers."

The last few months have also led to finger pointing among applicants, who believe that no one is playing fair.

Charter school operators and nonprofits that are bidding on schools claim the process has been unfair because district-based applicants have blocked many of their attempts to reach parents, students and teachers at schools.

"Information has not been given out equally to parents," said Iris Zuniga-Corona, chief of staff for the Youth Policy Institute, a nonprofit that is bidding for seven schools, including five in the San Fernando Valley.

Zuniga-Corona said at San Fernando Middle, teachers and administrators have sent fliers home with students promoting the school's own proposal and staff members have reached out to parents, but she has been prevented from doing the same or even connecting with teachers at the school.

"As much as the district has tried to make this a transparent and fair process at the local level, there is too much invested ... it's about people's jobs."

Jed Wallace, president of the California Charter School Association, said the political influencing of parents should force district officials to reconsider how important the votes should be to final decisions.

"When you force these arbitrary votes at a school or community level, that is when politics enter," Wallace said.

"We will see this process though till the end ... but if these activities result in decisions that don't make students the priority, we will question whether it's a viable process."

But district staff at schools subject to bids counter that the process has pitted teachers and administrators against better-funded and organized charter school operators and nonprofits.

Charter school operators are not required to hire union workers, and some nonprofits are proposing plans that do not guarantee a job to everyone at a school, although many plan to keep the same staff.

United Teachers Los Angeles president A.J. Duffy said in many cases teachers and administrators are simply trying to level the playing field.

"It was the school board that created this situation that led to this open struggle," Duffy said.

"(The district) needs to own up to the mistakes they have made and perhaps keep in mind for the next time that these things should and can be done in collaboration."

The district has asked the League of Women Voters to handle the voting process, which takes place Tuesday and Saturday this week.

Some 200 volunteers will handle the voting. League executive director Raquel Beltran said her organization did not draft the guidelines but will ensure that the voting process moves smoothly according to LAUSD's guidelines.

"We believe people should be a part of the democratic process at all levels of government," Beltran said.

"We commend the district for wanting to have such a process available to people."

However, some applicants are questioning elements of the voting process.

Under the voting guidelines there are seven carefully described categories of voters. Ballots for different voter categories will look differently, so they can be counted separately, but officials said no one category will be considered more important than another.

They include parents of students at one of the 12 low-performing schools; those whose children live in the attendance area of the 24 new schools; and teachers, administrators and school workers at the affected schools.

Adding more controversy to the already contentious process is the category of "community" member. That does not refer to people living around a school but has a wide-open definition that could allow almost anyone from anywhere, even from out of state, to cast a ballot for or against a school proposal.

The intention was to leave that category open for those who didn't fit the others - such as a school's alumni - but applicants fear competitors could abuse the category.

"Democracy has been lost in this process," Duffy said.

"The door has been left open for special-interest groups to bus parents from one location to another to vote. ... We will have `community members' voting who don't live anywhere near the school."

Still, district officials said in the end final decisions will be based on school operators who will improve academic performance at LAUSD.

"This will not be about who screams the loudest," Cortines said during a recent interview.

"It will be about what is best for the kids of this district."