$31.5 Million From State Doled Out by L.A. School Board : Education: Nearly half goes to district campuses. But teachers union says not enough is given for professional training.

Los Angeles Unified school board members divvied up much of a $31.5-million windfall of state money Monday night, after hours of debating which of many needs were neediest.

The money is ostensibly a one-time grant, not to be used for continuing programs or recurring expenses. But even in this relatively good budget year for the district, definitions of one-time uses become fuzzy.

Reflecting a districtwide movement toward decentralization, the board voted to give schools nearly half the money to spend as they please on areas such as teacher training, furniture and cleaning up and repairing campuses.

But among the recommendations postponed for consideration were those that are less clearly one-time commitments. For instance, the superintendent is proposing about $2.3 million to support several reform efforts, including his own initiative aimed at improving science and math instruction.

“These funds are one-time, and we need to think about that,” said board President Mark Slavkin. “We need to make sure that we’re not creating a hole for next year . . . an expectation.”

News of the block grant money came in July as part of Gov. Pete Wilson’s budget package, helping bump California up from 42nd to 40th in per-pupil spending nationwide.

It was a welcome addition to the district’s $4.4-billion budget because it fortified the small pot of money that comes with few spending requirements, in this case a general target of paying for supplies, technology and maintenance.

But to bring those categories up to par in Los Angeles Unified would cost about a billion dollars, Supt. Sid Thompson said.

On Monday, representatives of the United Teachers-Los Angeles union complained that too little of the money was earmarked specifically for teacher training and development. The union is to vote later this week on a proposed contract settlement that would restore pay to the levels of 1991, the year before significant cutbacks began.

UTLA President Helen Bernstein described the block grant distribution as “my first major disappointment in this new era of cooperation.”

“There is not a district in this country that would get that kind of money and not say . . . some percentage must go to professional development,” she said.

A few board members agreed with Bernstein’s criticism, but others chafed at her remarks, pointing out that teacher training was mentioned in many sections of the block grant spending plan. Thompson countered suggestions that half the money left to schools’ discretion be set aside for teacher training.

“You can’t have it both ways,” he said. “This is part of school reform . . . saying to the schools, ‘See what needs to be done and make some decisions.’ ”

In all, reform measures are expected to net a relatively small portion of the block grant. Highlights include about $1 million to fund Thompson’s science and math initiative; about $440,000 for the LEARN program, to match funds from a grant from the Walter Annenberg Foundation, and about $100,000 for the Los Angeles Educational Partnership learning centers.

The second largest chunk of the grant, more than $10 million, is to be used for school repairs and upkeep. The district has a $600-million backlog in this area, known as “deferred maintenance.”

Illustrating the severity of the problem, representatives from Pomelo Drive School in West Hills testified about their disintegrating playground. One student reported falling twice on gravel and sand, sustaining a permanent scar on his leg. District officials estimated that at least 15 other schools have the same problem.

None of the grant money is specifically aimed at textbook purchases, even though supplies are so low that many students must share books. But $2.9 million from another budget category is proposed for addition to the textbook fund.