Separate Districts Are Drawn : Remapping: A Latino coalition amends its plan so that 2 school board members would not have to move or run against each other next year.

A Latino group Monday amended its proposal to reapportion Los Angeles school board seats, drawing separate districts for board members Roberta Weintraub and Julie Korenstein so they would not have to run against each other.

An earlier remapping plan by the same group, the Latino Redistricting Coalition of Los Angeles, inadvertently placed both in the same San Fernando Valley-based district. If unchanged, they would have been forced to run against each other in 1993 or move from their longtime residences.

Leaders of the group said they had made a mistake and revised the proposal because they do not want to annoy incumbent board members into mobilizing opposition to the plan, which is subject to approval by the Los Angeles City Council.

The coalition’s new plan, unveiled at a hearing before a five-member Los Angeles City Council committee, places Korenstein in a district of her own that stretches from Porter Ranch--her home--to Westchester, and Weintraub in a district of her own that lies solely within the Valley.

Unaffected by the changes is the group’s original proposal to place the Latino-dominated areas of San Fernando and Pacoima in a district linked by a narrow corridor to the Eastside communities of Eagle Rock, Highland Park, El Sereno and Boyle Heights.

Although it obviates a Korenstein-Weintraub conflict, the new plan would still entail a major shift in Korenstein’s political base.

Her present seat, District 4, is situated solely in the West Valley, north of Mulholland Drive and west of the San Diego Freeway. Under the remapping plan proposed by the Latino coalition, 40% of the district would be in Brentwood, Pacific Palisades, Venice and Mar Vista.

The revised plan retains more of Korenstein’s traditional base than the original one.

The Latino group’s initial plan placed the bulk of Korenstein’s district on the Westside, raising questions whether Korenstein--even if she moved to the proposed district--could hold on to it if challenged by another fellow board member, Mark Slavkin.

Slavkin has represented the Westside for three years. But under both of the coalition’s plans, his district would be collapsed and moved to East Los Angeles to accomplish the coalition’s major goal--creating a second Latino-dominated district.

The upheaval also places Slavkin’s residence in board member Barbara Boudreaux’s mostly black district.

To remain on the board under either plan, Slavkin would have to move to Korenstein’s district and run against her. Under the revised plan, however, Korenstein’s seat might be less vulnerable to Slavkin because it would include less of his former constituency.

“It should be better for Korenstein,” said Alan Clayton, who co-authored the Latino plan.

Meanwhile, Weintraub’s Valley district would move west under the plan, with White Oak and Zelzah avenues and Aliso Canyon Wash forming its western boundary. The western border of Weintraub’s district now generally follows the San Diego Freeway. The district’s southern boundary is Mulholland Drive.

During presentation of the revised plan Monday night to the council’s Ad Hoc Redistricting Committee, Latino coalition leaders politely warned that if their plan is not adopted as presented, they would sue the city on the grounds of racial discrimination against Latinos.

Leo Estrada, a UCLA demographer who was an expert witness for Latino plaintiffs in the 1990 Los Angeles County redistricting suit, told the committee that it was his “professional assessment” that the plan “could withstand legal challenge and needs to be given great consideration” by the council.

Marshall Diaz, chairman of the Latino group, said the map had also been tentatively approved by black and Asian-American civil rights groups.

Council President John Ferraro, chairman of the committee, said he had asked the school board to produce its own plan for council review.

Neither Weintraub, Korenstein nor Slavkin attended Monday’s hearing and no one spoke on their behalf.