County Rejects Recovery Plan for Antelope Valley Schools

Los Angeles County education officials have rejected a proposed financial recovery plan for the Antelope Valley Union High School District, in effect increasing the district’s looming budget deficit to $10 million, according to officials on both sides.

District Supt. Kenneth Brummel said Thursday that county officials objected to the district this month canceling layoff warnings to about 500 teachers, and to the district presuming it will receive about $3 million in state funds for expected enrollment increases during the coming school year.

The dispute over budgeting the $3 million is particularly critical for the district.

With the money, district officials had been figuring on a $7-million shortfall heading into the next school year.

Without it, officials said the shortfall rises to about $10 million, which could force even deeper personnel cuts.

Officials of the Los Angeles County Office of Education informed district officials of their decision Tuesday and plan to relay a formal written notice to the district by Monday.

The district now has until May 21 to submit a revised plan, Brummel said.

The Antelope Valley district, with nearly 13,000 students and six campuses, two months ago became the first in the state to have a county monitor assigned to oversee its finances.

The move came under a new state law intended to give county officials more authority over districts with financial problems.

But because the state has its own fiscal problems, county education officials do not want the district to rely on state money it might not receive.

And, although the district is likely to get some state money, it typically would not know the amount until late in the year, making budget planning difficult.

“The county does not want us to take anything for granted. In a nutshell, the county is insisting on all caution and no gambling,” said Norm Miller, the district’s county-appointed fiscal monitor, who also is serving as assistant superintendent for business services.

Brummel had argued that the district ought to be able to count on the $3 million, based on typical state funding for a projected enrollment increase of 1,000 students next year. “That is an additional burden we didn’t expect,” he said of the county’s decision.

District officials had no comment Thursday on how they plan to cope with a larger deficit.

However, district and county education officials confirmed that they are completing plans for a multimillion-dollar county loan--probably about $4 million--to help the district through the present fiscal year.

The district lost some fiscal flexibility earlier this month when the school board voted 5 to 0 to send re-employment notices to permanent and probationary teachers.

The board did so over protests from county officials, who wanted the district to retain the right to lay off large numbers of employees.

The jobs of those who received re-employment notices usually would be considered legally immune from layoffs next year, although county officials are looking at a legal process that might permit their layoff anyway.

Brummel said the district can still cut 43 other teaching jobs, at a savings of $2 million next year, if needed.