L.A. School Board Toughens Expulsion Policies

The Los Angeles Board of Education toughened its expulsion policies Monday, calling for mandatory removal of students who are caught with illegal drugs or who cause physical injury to school employees. It also approved the development of a curriculum on nuclear weapon and nuclear energy issues.

Approval of the expulsion measures by 5-1 votes occurred a month after the board voted for mandatory expulsion of students caught carrying dangerous weapons on campus. Board members said they hope that approval of the three measures will “send a message” to students and the community that drugs, weapons and violence will not be tolerated on school grounds or at school-sponsored activities.

“What this means is that if you are guilty of the act, you cannot walk away from it,” said board member Tom Bartman, sponsor of two expulsion proposals. “I believe one of the major failings of the juvenile justice system is that it often leaves young people with the incorrect impression that they can walk away from a mistake in judgment. With these three policies, we are saying that you can no longer walk away. You can no longer avoid expulsion.”

Under present district policy, a school principal is the first to decide whether to recommend expulsion. If that recommendation is made, the student’s records are sent to a regional Expulsion Review Board, which passes its decision on to the district Expulsion Review Board.

The district review board can take three actions--recommend that a student not be expelled, recommend that the student be expelled and sent to a “continuation” school, or recommend that the student be expelled from all Los Angeles district schools.

“The (three proposals) will limit our actions to either expulsion and continuation school or straight expulsion,” said Don Bolton, an administrator in the Student Adjustment Services section who sits on the district’s Expulsion Review Board.

Even after the district review board has made its recommendation, the school board has the power to overturn the recommendation. Because of this lengthy review and appeal process, Bartman said, his intentions in advancing tougher expulsion policies were not purely punitive in nature.

“I want to get to the kids who are in trouble,” he said. “Unfortunately, some of the district’s best set of counseling and guidance services are part of the expulsion system. We have to make sure that these kids get the attention and help they need.”

Rita Walters was the only Board of Education member to vote against the motions. Member Jackie Goldberg was absent for both votes.

The mandatory expulsion policy on weapons, which was passed Jan. 21, will go into effect Friday. Bartman’s two mandatory expulsion proposals are scheduled to go into effect on April 1.

In a 6-1 vote, with only Bartman dissenting, the board directed its staff to begin preparing materials for classroom use that would present a “balanced” view of the development and debate surrounding nuclear weapons and nuclear energy issues. The proposal, authored by Goldberg, also calls for establishing workshops for teachers who want to learn how to incorporate nuclear policy topics into their lesson plans.

“What I want to happen is to make materials available for use in existing curriculum,” Goldberg said, adding that she “somewhat naively” brought the nuclear debate before the board believing it would not cause much controversy.

Board members came under criticism from members of the audience Monday for even discussing a nuclear weapon and energy curriculum. During the debate, some board members hid smiles when a speaker called them “dumbbells.” Sarah Foster, a member of the Libertarian Defense Caucus, told the board, “The notion that the issue of the so-called arms race and the threat of nuclear annihilation is of primary importance reflects an ideological bias.”

“You aren’t going to help the students by telling them what nuclear war is all about,” said Howard Watts, a frequent critic of board actions.

Goldberg’s answers to detailed questions by board members Roberta Weintraub and Bartman apparently eased some members’ anxieties over the intentions of the motion and led to statements of support for including nuclear policy discussions in the curriculum.

Delay Action

On another matter, the board again delayed a vote on a proposal to declare an asbestos contractor a “nonresponsible bidder” because of allegedly unsafe asbestos removal work at six schools.

The proposed sanction against P. W. Stephens Contractors Inc. of El Monte, which would bar the firm from working in district schools for two years, has been pending for a year, with board action postponed several times since last fall.

Stephens officials contend that their firm has performed as well as other district contractors.

The board was to consider a proposed settlement under which the formal sanction would be dropped in return for an agreement by Stephens to refrain from bidding on district asbestos work for a year. Board members gave no explanation for postponing a vote.