State Board to Restudy Shorter L.A. School Year : Education: Members to reconsider waiver that allowed the district to cut eight days off the spring semester so employees can apply for jobless benefits.

The State Board of Education, angered that the Los Angeles Unified School District has cut eight days off the spring semester so employees can apply for unemployment benefits, will reconsider the waiver it granted in October that allowed the move, state officials said Wednesday.

The action to shorten the semester was also decried as “felony stupid” by a leader of the state agency that allocates school construction funds, who on Wednesday asked attorneys to investigate whether the panel can withhold money from the district.

The moves by state officials are part of a growing public outcry over the decision by the Los Angeles school board, which ordered the eight furlough days to allow its employees, hurt by deep pay cuts, to be eligible for a special form of unemployment insurance for the time not worked.

The Los Angeles Unified School District had requested the state waiver to trim its school year so that it could save millions through salaries and operation costs. Rather than reduce the hourly wages of employees, the district is taking the salary cuts through furlough and unpaid vacation days. The plan approved this week saves only $800,000 in operating costs and could ultimately cost the district much more in increased premiums.

State Board of Education President Joseph Stein fired off a letter to Los Angeles school district Supt. Sid Thompson on Wednesday ordering that district officials attend the board’s Jan. 8 meeting, when the matter will be taken up.

In a memo accompanying the letter, Stein said that when the state board approved the waiver to shorten the semester, its members “had perceived” that the plan was fully supported by the Los Angeles school board, but that the plan now “appears to have become quite controversial.” The Los Angeles board approved the trimmed calender by a 4-3 vote on Monday after a contentious debate.

Also, Stein wrote, the state board was not aware at the time of approval that the waivers would allow the district’s employees to be eligible for a state compensation program for furloughed workers.

Under the “workshare” program, workers who are furloughed instead of being laid off can qualify for up to $46 a day in benefits.

“This matter was not brought to the board’s attention at the time any of the waivers . . . were under consideration,” said Stein, who is from Indian Wells.

“Something has happened, some information that (the state board) was told about in the beginning appears to have changed, and they want to know what has happened,” said Greg Geeting, executive director of the State Board of Education. “The unemployment benefit was never mentioned in connection with the waiver. . . . There was no mention in written or oral presentation to the board.”

Geeting said that although the state board can vote to rescind the waiver, it is unclear whether such a move can halt the change.

State school board member Frank L. Light of La Jolla said that he is upset over the district’s move to use the waivers so workers can collect unemployment benefits and that he would not have voted in favor if he had known that.

“It’s just another scheme to take money out of another one of the taxpayer’s pockets,” Light said, adding that he reluctantly approved the eight-day waiver only because he felt it offered a one-time chance for the district to save a “substantial amount of money.”

Last summer the school district requested permission to cut 17 days from the 180 days of instruction required by state law. In October the state board approved an eight-day trim accompanied by a longer school day so that total class time remains the same.

School board President Leticia Quezada, who opposed the shortened calendar, said Wednesday that she also is not sure that the state can block the change, saying such a move would “cause tremendous disarray for our schools, parents and teachers.”

District officials have been scrambling to send out informational letters to parents by this Friday, when school dismisses for the winter break.

“The reason why the (state board) is having this reaction is that Sacramento knows that whatever L.A. does, other districts will follow,” Quezada said, referring to the district’s participation in the benefit program. “The fact that this has started causes all sorts of concerns up and down the state.”

In Sacramento, Assemblyman Steve Peace (D-San Diego), an advocate of extending the school year statewide, charged Wednesday that the state board’s decision to allow the shortened year was “felony stupid” and “blatant idiocy.”

Peace, a member of a powerful state board that allocates construction funds to local school districts, said the decision to cut the school year may be illegal and could jeopardize millions of dollars earmarked for Los Angeles school construction.

Morain reported from Sacramento and Chavez from Los Angeles.