Council Chooses Sides for School Remap Battle : Redistricting: Picus, Wachs, Bernson are likely to oppose plan for two Latino-dominated districts.

San Fernando Valley-based legislators at Los Angeles City Hall are gearing up for a feisty--but apparently uphill--battle against a redistricting proposal for the city school board that critics say hurts Valley interests.

“I can’t vote for this plan,” Councilwoman Joy Picus said of the proposal to be presented to the full council for adoption Friday. “This plan disadvantages the Valley.”

The council’s ad hoc committee on redistricting voted 4 to 0 Tuesday to back the plan, proposed by a coalition of civil rights groups to create two school board seats in areas dominated by Latino voters.

But critics said the plan splinters and weakens the Valley’s clout because the area would be left with only one representative on the seven-member school board instead of two.

If the council does not voluntarily approve the plan, its primary architects, who seek greater political power for Latino voters, have threatened to sue to force its adoption.

“Then, let’s get sued,” a combative Councilman Joel Wachs said Tuesday. “It’s time to stop rolling over and playing dead. And who says we’re going to lose?”

Wachs said he is unhappy with the domination of “factors of race and ethnicity” in the reapportionment process.

Under the plan, the school board district now represented by Roberta Weintraub would be the only seat located wholly within the Valley.

The proposal calls for three other districts to include portions of the Valley, but the bulk of their constituencies would be in the Westside and the central city.

The Valley’s 2nd District, currently represented by Julie Korenstein, would be merged with the Westside to create a district running from Porter Ranch to Westchester. The Westside portions of this district are now represented by Mark Slavkin. Approval of the plan would place Slavkin and Korenstein in the same district, setting the stage for an election battle between the two board members next year.

Additionally, the heavily Latino areas of the East Valley would be represented by two districts--one based in the central city, the other in East Los Angeles. The latter would be one of the two Latino-dominated districts the plan would create.

Councilman Hal Bernson’s chief deputy, Greig Smith, said he will advise his boss to vote against the plan. “I think Hal will be very disturbed that the Valley is getting the short end of the stick,” Smith said. “I’ll be advising him to vote against it.”

Bernson is in Europe on a two-week trip that is part vacation and part business. Although Bernson won’t return in time to vote Friday, he’ll be present when the expected second vote on the plan is taken next week.

If there’s any opposition to the measure Friday, another vote will be required under municipal law.

Councilman Ernani Bernardi said he has not made up his mind how he’ll vote. The lawmaker said that although he has qualms about the plan, he believes “voting against it is going to be a losing cause.”

Picus, Wachs, Bernson and Bernardi are the only council members who represent council districts located wholly in the Valley.

A Times survey found no other council members critical of the plan except Councilman Nate Holden. Holden, a frequently mentioned mayoral candidate who has sought to develop allies in the Valley, said the plan looked to him like “gerrymandering in the worst way.”

Korenstein, one school board member whose future seems most imperiled by the redistricting proposal, warned Tuesday that any Valley lawmaker who fails to vote against this plan may face political retribution. “They better think twice about this,” she said. “People are as mad as all get-out about this.”

Korenstein also said Councilman Zev Yaroslavsky’s vote Monday as a member of the ad hoc committee is the “proof in the pudding” that Valley interests will be shortchanged by the redistricting plan.

With his vote, Yaroslavsky favored the Westside--where the majority of his council district is located--even though he also represents Sherman Oaks and parts of Van Nuys and Studio City, Korenstein said.

“Zev’s vote is the perfect example,” Korenstein said. “He was supporting his allies on the Westside. It proves that when the representative lives in one area, and has the majority of his district in one area, he will vote with them, not the Valley.”

Meanwhile, the plan appears to help Weintraub, according to political observers. Weintraub did not return phone calls Tuesday to comment on the plan. On Monday, she sent an aide to City Hall to testify briefly on behalf of the plan.

The proposed plan is “a dream for Roberta” because it shaves off the Latino end of her current district, said Smith of Bernson’s office. In 1989, Weintraub narrowly avoided a runoff election by winning 51.69% of the vote in the primary against two underfunded outsiders, including a Latino activist.

Latinos make up more than 50% of Weintraub’s current constituency. In the district being proposed for her under the new plan, Latinos would consist of only 26% of the population and 7% of the registered voters.

Cecelia Mansfield--a vice president of the 31st District PTA, which represents the Valley school community--speculated that Weintraub is “not uncomfortable with this plan because it gives her a new constituency that she sees will be to her advantage. No longer will she be so much in the East Valley.”

School Board Districts Existing: Districts 4 and 6 are in the San Fernando Valley. Proposed: District 4 to Westchester and District 5 to Boyle Heights.