State School Board Adopts Policy Easing Way for Secessions

Ending months of silence on how it might deal with proposals to break up the Los Angeles school system, the State Board of Education on Wednesday brushed aside proposed rules that would have made it harder for communities to form new districts.

The board unanimously adopted a policy that allows any group petitioning to secede from the Los Angeles Unified School District to merely assert that it will follow state laws, without having to prove it by undertaking complex demographic studies.

Breakup proponents said they were relieved that one more potential roadblock had been removed.

“On to the next battle now, wherever that happens to be,” said Stephanie Carter, co-chairwoman of the Valley breakup group called Finally Restoring Excellence to Education. “It’s a relief, because now we can focus on satisfying the requirements. They’re doable. The regulations that were being proposed are not doable.”

The regulations, urged to the board by the state Department of Education, would have required breakup petitioners to show the effects of their secession plans on such factors as socioeconomic diversity, teacher assignments and minority protections, including desegregation and programs to equalize spending between schools.

The regulations were meant to interpret legislation authored by state Sen. Tom Hayden (D-Los Angeles) as part of the 1995 law that made breakup politically feasible for the first time.

Hayden’s bill, which applies only to the Los Angeles Unified School District, established 10 conditions in addition to the existing provisions of state law covering school district reorganization.

But at two hearings held in Los Angeles late in May, breakup proponents including politicians, parents and civic leaders sharply criticized the proposed regulations as an attempt to thwart their plans.

Rep. Howard P. “Buck” McKeon (R-Santa Clarita) said at one hearing that the regulations would have “made it impossible for San Fernando Valley parents to pursue their hopes.”

After the hearings, board member Marion McDowell drafted a two-page policy statement that became the basis for the board’s action Wednesday during its regular meeting in Sacramento.

In her statement, adopted in a 7-0 vote, McDowell argued that it would be the new district, not the petitioners, that should be held accountable for meeting the conditions, and that any disputes could be settled by the courts afterward.

Acknowledging the impossibility of forming a breakaway district with the same socioeconomic characteristics as the old district, McDowell reasoned it is only necessary to show “reasonable” diversity.

“Whether the conditions are actually met by any new district ultimately established is a factual matter that can only be determined at a future date, and the actual meeting of the conditions is effectively beyond the petitioners’ control,” McDowell said.

She went even further concerning minority protections, saying the burden falls on those who oppose the petition “to establish that the formation of the proposed new district will diminish minority protections.”

Despite the tongue-lashing board members received during the May hearings, the Department of Education staff still pressed for the regulations as a way to prevent uneven application of the law.

A school district representative also argued in favor of the regulations, saying McDowell’s policy statement was in part more vague than the law itself.

However, both McDowell and board member Robert L. Trigg said they were persuaded that any regulations would be unnecessarily burdensome.

The board, which makes the final decision on whether a breakup proposal will be placed on the ballot, began deliberating the question of regulations last fall.

The long delay has held up a decision on the only petition now before it, requesting secession of the small South Bay city of Lomita from the Los Angeles district.

Four other secession proposals, covering the San Fernando Valley, South-Central Los Angeles and the city of Carson, are being reviewed at the county level and could reach the state board this year.