L.A. School District Proves Again It’s Beyond Help : Repeated attempts at getting the education bureaucrats to bend and adapt have been rebuffed with nothing but lip service.

Yvonne Chan has learned the hard way how slowly change comes to the massive Los Angeles Unified School District--if it ever comes at all.

The highly respected principal of the Vaughn Next Century Learning Center in Pacoima, Chan and the parents of the children who attend the school thought its “charter” designation would insulate them from the many LAUSD policies and guarantee a certain level of funding.

Wrong.

Wringing their hands, district officials say they support the concept of charter schools but contend they are forced to reduce funding by consent decrees that require the district to distribute money and other resources throughout the district.

If that’s the case, I’ll attempt to fix the problem through legislation. But the struggle of Yvonne Chan and her supporters is a perfect example of why an overwhelming majority of San Fernando Valley parents support the breakup of the school district.

When it comes to the LAUSD and the school board, it’s always something.

For those of us who believe that kids and education are the cornerstone of our society, the frustration has become too great. This ship is just too big to turn.

And while I struggled with the many problems of the LAUSD for years, this summer’s decision to support its dismantling was one of the toughest of my political career.

I have represented an ever-changing, multiethnic, racially mixed district for more than a decade. In an attempt to empower those who feel they are without a voice, I have championed change from within, guiding constituents and community organizations through the bureaucratic maze of state and local government.

But I have come to a dead end with the LAUSD.

Despite pressure from officials like myself, the district has thwarted every effort to realize meaningful change for the children of Los Angeles.

It has stymied parent councils and school-based management. It pays lip service to the reforms proposed by the Los Angeles Educational Alliance for Restructuring Now with half-hearted platitudes. It can’t even decide whether kids who bring guns to school should be expelled.

If, despite the best intentions, the school district cannot muster all the talent it has at its disposal to reform itself, the people of this city will force reform. And I can no longer find it in my heart not to support that effort.

The bottom line is not just a better education but the best of education for our children.

New school districts must allow and actively support creative ideas that allow parents, teachers and administrators at the school site to determine what’s best.

The skeptics have criticized my change of position as politically expedient. Frankly, that’s ridiculous.

Had I been opting for political expediency, I would have followed the advice of my consultants and supporters and endorsed the breakup during my mayoral campaign.

The truth is, I believe in public education. I do not advocate the overthrow of public schools.

Rather, I demand that our public schools prepare the children of our great city for a future full of possibilities.

The challenges are too great for us to wait any longer.