Study Finds Little Ethnic, Economic Gap in Schools Split

A new school district in the north San Fernando Valley would be poorer and more heavily Latino than a district proposed for the south Valley, but the gap is less extreme than some breakup opponents had feared, according to a preliminary report released Wednesday.

Although containing no conclusions or recommendations, the thick two-volume “progress report” examined the feasibility of dismantling the nation’s second-largest school district and creating two new Valley systems.

The document “will change as we receive additional information,” said Pamela Johnson, secretary to the Los Angeles County Committee on School District Organization, whose 11 members are elected by school district governing boards in the county. The panel will make a recommendation to the state Board of Education by June 7 on whether to put the issue before voters.

At three public hearings before the county committee, opponents of secession from the Los Angeles Unified School District argued that poor, minority students would comprise 80% or more of the north Valley district, while the south district would be dominated by white, upper-middle-class students.

But the report, based on census figures, showed that neither whites nor Latinos would represent a clear majority in either district.

The proposed north Valley district would have 118,093 students, with Latinos accounting for 48% of the student population and whites 36%. The per-capita income is $22,504.

In comparison, the south Valley district would have 98,406 students, with Latinos making up 37% of the students and whites 50%. The per-capita income is $27,957.

In both proposed districts, the percentage of Latino students would lag the current enrollment makeup of Los Angeles Unified, where 70% of the 711,000 students are Latino.

Stephanie Carter, a leader of Finally Restoring Excellence in Education, or FREE, the grass-roots group leading the L.A. Unified breakup effort, said she had not studied the report in detail but the preliminary findings come as no surprise.

“People had preconceived notions about how the two districts would look,” said Carter, one of a handful of people who attended the Wednesday morning meeting at the county education office headquarters in Downey.

Leaders of FREE have maintained the proposed districts would be roughly comparable in ethnic and economic terms.

But Ana Soriano, who strongly opposes a breakup, questioned the data. “If you really see the areas [in the proposed north district], you will see immigrants who are not affluent,” said Soriano, a Sylmar mother of four. “Breakup would be awful.”

She also criticized FREE for failing to make north Valley residents aware of its plans. “People out here don’t even know about it,” Soriano said Wednesday.

The county is required by the state to ensure the proposed districts would not promote racial or ethnic discrimination or segregation, among other factors.

Several committee members requested more information on the socioeconomic factors.

“Over and over again, people are saying [the proposed districts] would be the haves and the have-nots,” member Rachel Chavez said.

Although county education officials said they have “a pretty good handle” on the socioeconomic data, they said they are still gathering more information.

The report was compiled by Caldwell Flores Winters Inc., a consulting group based in Cardiff by the Sea, and based on public comments and documents from the state and Los Angeles Unified.

LAUSD officials have not taken a stand on Valley school secession.

But Los Angeles Board of Education members, including President Genethia Hayes, said a district reorganization plan unveiled last month would give schools less bureaucracy and more autonomy. It would slash the district’s huge central office and move power over budget and instruction to 11 new sub-districts, three of which are in the Valley.

The Board of Education is expected to vote on the plan Tuesday.