Board OKs Loans for School

After angrily rebuking opponents of the stalled project to build an $87-million high school downtown, a bare majority of the Los Angeles Board of Education on Monday approved the loans needed to start construction.

In a 4-3 vote, the board took the painful step of financing the controversial Belmont Learning Center with loans that must be repaid from the district’s general fund rather than using less costly funds from Proposition BB, the $2.4-billion school bond approved by voters in April. School officials said it will cost $8 million a year for 20 years to repay the loan.

A citizens oversight committee set up to monitor the Proposition BB spending had recommended last week against the use of the bond funds. Although the vote was only advisory, no board member suggested disregarding the panel’s recommendation.

Instead, the majority lashed out at those they believe have tried to scuttle construction of the innovative high school just west of the Harbor Freeway in the Temple-Beaudry neighborhood.

Saying she was “shocked and disgusted” by the maneuvers of two labor unions that went to court to block the project, board member Barbara Boudreaux touched off a flurry of barbs in which board members castigated each other, union leaders and the news media for hurting the interests of schoolchildren.

Board member Mark Slavkin, in his last meeting after eight years on the board, railed at a newspaper editorial Sunday urging that the controversial project be rebid and later held up a headline in another paper that he said misinformed the public.

Three board members opposed the use of the financing, called certificates of participation, saying the project is too expensive and should have been competitively bid.

“We need to build lots of schools,” board member Julie Korenstein said, trying to deflect criticism that opponents are opposed to construction of the school, needed to relieve pressure at the current Belmont High School, the district’s most crowded.

“The debate is on the cost,” Korenstein said. “That cost is outrageous.”

Board members David Tokofsky and George Kiriyama also opposed the board’s action. Tokofsky peppered school district officials with questions about the cost, causing a rebuke from another member.

“I feel disgusted and indignant,” said board member Victoria M. Castro, “that this has become a childish game of 40 questions.”

Like Boudreaux, Castro denounced United Teachers Los Angeles, the teachers union, and Local 11 of the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees Union, for taking the district to court in an attempt to block the Belmont project.

UTLA president Day Higuchi said he opposed the project because he doubted the district will ever receive state matching funds.

“If it is too risky for Proposition BB oversight, it’s too risky for any funding,” Higuchi said. “You should do it right. You should get matching funds. You should build several schools, not one.”

The hotel and restaurant workers union is opposed to the district’s developer, Kajima International, which is fighting the union’s efforts to organize workers at the New Otani hotel in Little Tokyo.

David Koff, representing the restaurant and hotel union, said the union has persisted in its opposition because the developer is not a suitable partner for the district.

With the financing now in place, school officials said work on the school could resume almost immediately. They expect to hold a groundbreaking July 15.

*

The board had already approved the project by the same 4-3 vote in April but intended to use funds from the $2.4-billion school bond approved by the voters just days before.

Work was halted six weeks ago by a Superior Court judge who agreed with the two unions that the use of Proposition BB funds required the review of a citizens oversight committee set up in the bond measure.

After twice rejecting the committee’s recommendation, Judge Diane Wayne lifted her injunction Friday when the committee voted to oppose the use of BB funds at this time.

In another matter related to Proposition BB, the board took no action Monday on its scheduled vote to approve 10 project managers to oversee school bond repairs in different parts of the district.

After the board on June 2 approved on a program manager to oversee the entire project, The Times disclosed that all of the 11 firms had previous ties to the MTA and that some had encountered widely publicized problems not reported to the district’s selection committee.

The item was pulled from the agenda without explanation.

On Monday, state Sen. Tom Hayden (D-Los Angeles) proposed an amendment to pending legislation that would require the district to create a position similar to the MTA’s inspector general. That individual would review all expenditures for school design, construction and repair.