Inglewood Board Chief Challenges School Budget Cuts

Political combat raged on the Inglewood school board this week as board President Lois Hill-Hale challenged the legality of sweeping administrative cutbacks approved by her fellow board members and refused to recognize their appointment of an interim superintendent.

At a wild budget meeting Monday, board members Caroline Coleman and Zyra McCloud decided--over Hill-Hale’s angry objections--to cut about $325,000 worth of administrative jobs, eliminating the job of acting Supt. Vashti Roberts and cutting, demoting or consolidating several other positions.

McCloud and Coleman voted to appoint Lynn Colvin, a 19-year district employee who is director of elementary education, to serve as interim superintendent until the board selects a replacement for former Supt. Rex Fortune, who resigned. Hill-Hale refused to recognize Colvin’s appointment and said she would still consider Roberts, who some employees described as a close ally of Hill-Hale, to be acting superintendent.

Working With 2 Vacancies

For several months the five-member board has functioned with two vacancies due to the death of one board member and the resignation of another. County human relations consultant Larry Aubry was elected to fill one vacancy June 7, but has not been sworn in because county officials did not certify his election until Tuesday. He will be sworn in at the next board meeting July 11.

On Wednesday, Hill-Hale initiated what could become a convoluted legal debate after consulting with County Counsel Audrey Oliver, who provides legal advice for the district. In an interview, Hill-Hale charged that the staff cuts, which Coleman and McCloud approved at a budget study meeting before Monday night’s regular board meeting, violated the state’s open-meetings law because the specific reductions were not listed on the agenda made public before the meeting.

Oliver refused to confirm Hill-Hale’s statement or otherwise discuss the conversation, citing attorney-client confidentiality.

Terry Francke, an attorney for the California Newspaper Publishers Assn., said the case is not clear-cut.

“It’s an open question whether highly specific action proposals are required to be specified on an agenda in the context of a very complex piece of work like a budget,” Francke said.

The open-meetings law, known as the Brown Act, requires a board to post an agenda listing “proposed discussion and action” 72 hours before a meeting, Francke said. The law requires a board to list a “brief general description” of business items. Francke said that would appear to permit listing of a general topic like “budget cuts” on an agenda, though he said a board could violate the law if it listed specific proposed actions on the agenda and then took other actions that were not on the agenda.

District administrators apparently did not see a need to specify proposed cuts on the board’s agenda. The agenda listed only a general item, approval of the budget, and said unspecified reductions would be made if necessary. Specific budget cuts proposed by the administration were listed on work sheets handed to audience members. During the meeting, McCloud unveiled her own list of recommendations, which she and Coleman approved for the most part.

Hill-Hale said she also questioned whether the approval by only two board members is legal. That put her in a peculiar position, because she and McCloud teamed up in February to extend Fortune’s contract over Coleman’s vigorous objections. And the board functioned with only two members--Hill-Hale and McCloud--during a subsequent six-week period when Coleman was ill.

County Counsel Oliver provided a written opinion in February saying two board members constitute a quorum and can pass or defeat items when there are two vacancies.

“(Hill-Hale) is saying to the public it was OK when she did it, but it’s not OK when she’s against it,” McCloud said in an interview. She said she carefully prepared Monday’s list of budget recommendations in consultation with principals and other employees.

Before McCloud unveiled her recommendations, the three board members balanced the budget by cutting about $360,000. McCloud and Coleman then cut an additional estimated $325,000, which included:

Elimination of the post of assistant superintendent of educational services (Roberts).

Elimination of the director of secondary education.

Demotion of the assistant superintendent of personnel to director of personnel.

Elimination of a budget manager in the accounting department.

Elimination of a secretary and two clerks in the central office.

Reassignment of several employees involved in purchasing.

In addition, the board restored about $161,000 that had been cut from school administrative, clerical and custodial budgets.

Political Vendetta

Hill-Hale accused McCloud and Coleman of waging a personal and political vendetta against selected employees that would “destroy the district.”

“I had calls from district employees who said Mrs. McCloud was going around the school district like a loose cannon threatening their jobs if they did not do what she said,” Hill-Hale said in an interview. “I want a complete investigation of this. I’m trying to protect the integrity of the district. I’m very disappointed in Mrs. McCloud because she campaigned against personal and political agendas.” She said she believed that McCloud and Coleman, who are not usually allies, had agreed before the meeting on cuts that would protect their allies and punish adversaries.

In response, Coleman said: “Mrs. Hale knows there was no deal cut.” Coleman said one of the demoted administrators was a longtime friend.

“I have been voting, recommending and begging for cuts from the central office for 10 years,” she said. “I’m hoping that once a decision has been made, she’ll accept what was done, whether she likes it or not.”

McCloud also said there was no deal between her and Coleman: “The administrators were protecting themselves and their jobs. There was fat at the administrative level, and we wanted to cut the furthest away from the schools. Mrs. Coleman saw that I had done my homework and that I had a wide base of recommendations. She felt it was the best for the district.”

Colvin assumed the superintendent’s duties Wednesday. She said she regrets that Hill-Hale refuses to accept her appointment.

“I pride myself on being able to work with all people,” she said. “I hope to continue in those footsteps.”

Roberts said she would serve in her normal position, assistant superintendent of education services, until the budget cuts go into effect Friday and her job is eliminated.

She said she would abide by the ruling of the county counsel on whether actions taken at Monday’s meeting were proper. Hill-Hale said she would contact the other board members regarding her conversation with Oliver.

A tentative budget must be received by county officials by Friday. The final budget will be due Sept. 15.