L.A. Unified Appoints 11 Leaders for Subdistricts

Los Angeles school officials chose school district administrators to lead nine of the 11 subdistricts created by a sweeping reorganization. The other two appointees worked most recently in the Compton and Santa Rosa school districts.

Under the reorganization plan developed by interim Supt. Ramon C. Cortines, which takes effect July 1, the leaders will have substantial control over resources in their districts and the autonomy to make most decisions about budgeting, procurement and personnel. They will also be accountable for improving the academic performance of their students.

“I could not be more pleased. This is a great, great team,” the newly appointed general superintendent, Roy Romer, said at a news conference.

“We’re going to bring the administration of Los Angeles Unified as close as we can to the families in this district,” Romer said. “The only responsibilities that will be directed by the central core will be those things required of us by the state and federal government, and things like the busing system.”

The reorganization is the cornerstone of Cortines’ efforts to reform the district. But some observers were skeptical of the new team’s ability to be agents of change.

“They talk about reform and then put in insiders,” said Paula Boland, a leader of Finally Restoring Excellence in Education, or FREE, a group seeking to break up the district. “The one thing we can count on with the school board is that [it’s] predictable. How many times have we heard it’s going to be different?”

“It’s so predictable,” lamented Los Angeles Board of Education member David Tokofsky. “These are chameleon administrators who too often put their finger to the wind and make decisions based on whether they are career enhancing or limiting.”

Former board member Mark Slavkin disagreed with their assessments. “I know these people fairly well and they are not representative of the old guard; they are people who’ve been more on the side of change and reform,” he said.

“Generally speaking,” he said, “these superintendents reflect the right values that will help their districts move ahead.”

Bill Ouchi, vice dean of the Anderson Graduate School of Management at UCLA, also applauded the effort.

“There was a reaching down deeper into the talent pool to find people who . . . have demonstrated skill at leadership, not an automatic movement up without real analysis and real thought and willingness to make some very hard decisions,” Ouchi said.

The new superintendents, who will be paid $150,000 a year, include four Latinos, four whites and three African Americans. Their task is to guide instructional priorities and strengthen community relations in the new districts. Most are administrators in the district’s current so-called cluster organizational structure, which is built around high schools and the schools that feed them.

The nine superintendents drawn from L.A. Unified have an average of 26 years’ experience in the district and, with one exception, will enjoy average salary boosts of 38% to 44%. Deputy Supt. Liliam Castillo will suffer a slight pay cut.

In districts where breakup sentiment is strong, the superintendents said they will work hard to restore public confidence. All of them said in interviews that their primary goals include improving academic achievement, instruction and professional development.

The L.A. district employees promoted are cluster administrator Deborah L. Leidner; Assistant Supt. Judy I. Burton; Assistant Supt. Robert J. Collins; cluster administrator Merle E. Price; Deputy Supt. Castillo; cluster administrator Richard A. Alonzo; Assistant Supt. Renee E. Jackson, cluster administrator Bonnie S. Rubio and Assistant Supt. Richard A. Vladovic.

The outsiders are George J. McKenna III, deputy superintendent of the Compton Unified School District, and Dale Vigil, former superintendent of Santa Rosa city schools.

The selection culminated a nationwide search in which the district accepted more than 300 applications from 25 states--220 of them from outside the district.

After a screening process, the 10 most highly qualified and experienced candidates for each district were interviewed in late May by local committees made up of administrators, teachers, parents, community leaders and high school students.

The top three or four candidates in each district were interviewed by Cortines.

The selection process was well underway by the time the Board of Education chose Romer to become the new general superintendent. Romer, named to the job June 6, participated in the evaluation of the finalists.

Cortines said he tried to match the candidates’ skills and experience to the particular needs of individual districts.

“These are 11 outstanding individuals,” Cortines said in a prepared statement. “I truly believe that our selection process has produced some of the finest educators I have encountered, and I’m particularly pleased that so many came from this district.

“You should start seeing progress real soon,” he said.

In the meantime, Romer said he has asked Cortines to “continue to advise and consult with me from time to time on a contract basis. . . . I value his skill, expertise and counsel. So I’ll get all I can get.”

Times staff writer Doug Smith contributed to this story.

* A LOOK AT THE NEW LEADERS: Profiles of the 11 new subdistrict superintendents. B2