All-Year Schools to Get State Money First, Districts Told : Education: Santa Clarita Valley officials reopen debate on controversial scheduling plan.

Santa Clarita Valley school districts will have to radopt some form of year-round class schedule if they expect to receive priority status for state money they desperately need to build new schools, two top state education officials said Thursday.

“What the state is saying is very clear: First priority will go to those with year-round” schools, said Peter G. Mehas, Gov. George Deukmejian’s education adviser. “If locals say they don’t want year-round then . . . they will have to fend for themselves.”

The statement was a pointed reiteration of a policy that has been in place since 1986, designed to maximize the efficient use of existing school facilities. But only 30 school districts in the state have chosen to buck frequent parent opposition and adopt year-round schedules during the past three years.

Clyde Smyth, superintendent of the William S. Hart Union High School District in Newhall, said Mehas’ firm statement of the policy at a meeting Thursday would prompt Smyth to propose a year-round class schedule for schools in his district before spring.

“Now that we know exactly what the ground rules are, we know what direction to take,” Smyth said.

Smyth acknowledged that such a proposal would be controversial and the topic of numerous public hearings before a final decision is reached. “This is going to be a very interesting time,” he said.

Last week, the mammoth Los Angeles Unified School District adopted a year-round schedule for all of its schools, causing a storm of parental outrage, especially in the San Fernando Valley and Westside. The controversial decision also has fueled a drive by state Assemblywoman Marian La Follette (R-Northridge) to break up the district.

The statements by Mehas and Lyle A. Smoot, executive director of the State Allocation Board, which disperses school construction funds, came during a meeting called by Supervisor Mike Antonovich that was attended by Santa Clarita Valley educators, county and state officials, and developers.

The gathering, billed by Antonovich’s office as an “education summit,” was designed to bring together key officials to discuss the complex school finance problems that have led to a virtual breakdown in the state’s system for funding new school construction.

The 16 officials in attendance appeared unanimous in agreeing to support legislation that would make it easier for school districts to raise local property taxes to pay for campus construction.

Attendees, who included the superintendents of the five Santa Clarita Valley school districts, also agreed that solving the funding crisis will require a multipronged attack that includes making it easier for the districts and the state to raise money through bond measures and developer fees. “There is not a single, silver magic bullet,” Mehas said.

Antonovich declined to commit himself to supporting any school fund-raising measure, including a quarter-cent sales tax proposed by Sen. Ed Davis (R-Valencia). The sales tax measure is supported by the Santa Clarita Valley school districts and the Building Industry Assn.

Instead, Antonovich asked the group to reconvene within a month and to present him with recommended solutions. The county’s support for a legislative solution would be significant because of its influential lobbying strength in Sacramento.

Santa Clarita school officials have been engaged in bitter debates, lawsuits and confrontations with developers and county supervisors during the past five years over the issue of who should pay for building new schools.

School officials maintain that the county should not approve new housing tracts unless developers help pay for building new schools. The county says that school financing is a state responsibility and that local governments should not reject new housing just because it might overburden schools.

“We feel that certain people, including the Board of Supervisors, have not wanted to listen to us,” said Gloria Mercado, president of the Santa Clarita Valley Trustees Assn.

State education officials estimate that $17 billion will need to be spent for new schools in the next decade to keep pace with California’s growing enrollments. The demand greatly exceeds the currently available state and local means of raising construction money--a combination of developer fees, state and local bonds, and state tideland oil tax revenue.

In the Santa Clarita Valley alone, one of the fastest-growing areas in the state, about $400 million in school construction money is needed immediately, Smyth said.

With such demands being placed on a limited amount of state money, Smoot said, the allocation board has resorted to a priority system for distributing funds. Because year-round schedules increase the capacity of campuses, districts with such schedules are given “first call on the money,” Smoot said.

Along with adopting year-round schedules, districts must contribute 50% of the cost of new schools in order to receive priority status for the state money.

School districts are not required to go to year-round schedules to receive state school construction money, “but priority will go to those with year-round schools,” Mehas said.

The Saugus Union School District already has some of its elementary schools on a year-round schedule. However, two months ago, the Newhall School District board bowed to parental pressure and delayed the start of year-round school for two years.