Trim Education, Compromise the Future : Schools: Cutbacks can’t be avoided, given the state debt. But California, 32nd in per-pupil spending, must do more.

Public schools have served the children of Los Angeles since 1855. Over the course of 137 years the schools, like the city, have known success and failure. Our goal is to enable every child to succeed in school, and we have shown improvement toward this goal. More students are finishing high school. More students are taking and passing advanced placement tests. More students are going to college. All ethnic groups have shown improvement.

Our finances have also had good and lean years. This is a lean one. But even in good years, California spends less than most states for K-12 education; the state ranks 32nd in the nation in per-pupil spending, despite the fact that we are eighth among the 50 states in per-capita income. Other states with better funding are able to offer smaller classes. Other states have better ways of financing new schools. Preschool and adult programs of proven quality are underfunded in California. This is why we press for better school funding even in tough economic times.

Some people say we spend too much at central and region offices and that there would be no financial crisis if the district cut administrative costs. Actually, we spend a smaller percentage for administration than other districts do, and have done so for more than 10 years. Today, Los Angeles spends only about 5% of its resources for central and region offices. This includes the cost of selecting and assigning employees, preparing paychecks, accounting for expenditures and student attendance and supervising the construction of new schools.

The school board has cut about 5,000 positions since 1989, even though enrollment increased by more than 40,000 students. Our remaining employees are hard-pressed to provide needed services, yet we still face a deficit. Rather than lay off more employees, the board and the superintendent are proposing to reduce employees’ salary rates and to require all employees to take some unpaid days in 1992-93.

The lowest-paid employees would have no pay-rate reduction, but could have some unpaid days. Most employees would have a 3.1% pay-rate reduction and 23 unpaid days (an annual salary reduction of about 13% compared with 1991-92). The highest-paid employees would have a 5.6% pay-rate reduction and 29 unpaid days.

It is hard for employees to take any pay cuts, much less the magnitude faced this year. Anger is understandable, but it is unrealistic to expect that schools can avoid hardship when unemployment has reached 9% in California and 11% in Los Angeles County. In other public and private sector organizations, many of those lucky enough not to be laid off are also taking substantial pay cuts.

Many employees are concerned about health insurance. The district proposed some rule changes to help control costs. However, it will continue to provide comprehensive health coverage to all employees, their dependents and retirees. Even with the changes proposed, the school district will have a far better benefit plan than most employers offer.

It has been suggested that the district run the schools at current salary levels until we run out of money, then close down. This would not be legal. The state Department of Education would take over the schools and make the necessary cuts, if we did not adopt a balanced budget for the year.

It has also been suggested that, if employees are going to have unpaid days anyway, they may as well go on strike. This would be self-defeating. The district’s revenues depend on student attendance and would surely drop during a strike. There would be even less money for salaries after employees came back to work.

There are some who would replace our public-education system with a voucher scheme, in which children’s education would depend heavily on their parents’ ability to pay. This is not the time for actions that would undermine public support for public education in our community.

Many Los Angeles residents have little opportunity to improve their economic condition. Schools offer a chance for self-help and must be a key factor in rebuilding Los Angeles. Neglecting them now doesn’t make sense.

So far, the schools have held together. We continue to offer help and hope to the children of Los Angeles. Let’s try to understand each other better and work together to get through this difficult time.