Judge deals new blow to mayor’s bid for partial control of schools

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa suffered his second legal setback in his quest to gain substantial control of Los Angeles public schools Thursday, when a judge roundly rejected his request to proceed with his plans.

Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Dzintra I. Janavs rebuffed arguments by lawyers for Villaraigosa and a parents group that her December ruling in the case should automatically be put on hold while Villaraigosa appeals.

In that ruling, Janavs declared unconstitutional a new law that would have granted Villaraigosa substantial authority over the school district, stripping the elected school board of much of its power and putting the mayor directly in charge of three high schools and the campuses that feed into them. Janavs ordered the mayor and other public officials “to refrain from enforcing or implementing” any part of the measure.

In Thursday’s hearing, Janavs said there was no obvious precedent on whether her ruling had to be automatically set aside pending appeal -- as the mayor’s lawyers had contended. Janavs sided with district lawyers who countered that a stay is triggered only when a judge’s order requires one side to take specific action. She said her order was simply prohibiting the law from taking effect.

After losing on the larger issue, Villaraigosa’s lawyers asked Janavs to at least allow the mayor to proceed with the takeover of the three “clusters” of schools. The law stated that the mayor and the L.A. Unified superintendent must pick the first cluster by Feb.1 and the second a month later.

But Janavs rejected the argument that waiting for an appeal decision -- expected in mid-April -- would undermine the mayor’s ability to get the clusters up and running by the start of the next school year. She also asked rhetorically whether the Legislature could push back the deadlines for choosing the clusters.

As she did last month, Janavs aggressively questioned attorney Bradley S. Phillips, who argued the mayor’s side throughout the hearing. She reserved some of her harshest language Thursday for discussion of the clusters, saying the mayor’s lawyers were asking to move quickly with what she believed to be “one of the more serious aspects of unconstitutionality” contained in the law.

To permit that, she said, would cause the district “considerable interruption and interference.”

Villaraigosa’s legal counsel, Thomas Saenz, said he was not surprised by the judge’s latest ruling, given her earlier denial. Saenz, who watched Thursday’s arguments from the back of the courtroom, said the mayor’s attorneys would ask a state appeals court to put Janavs’ original ruling on hold while it decides whether to uphold it.

To speed the appeals process, the mayor this week also asked the state Supreme Court to hear an appeal directly, skipping the appellate court.

“We have always known that the timeline for implementing our school reforms would be challenging, but change cannot wait,” Villaraigosa said in a statement.

Outside the courtroom, school board President Marlene Canter said she “was very gratified” with Janavs’ ruling. Canter lashed out at Villaraigosa, saying he has refused to meet with her, instead offering up Deputy Mayor Ramon C. Cortines. She questioned the sincerity of the mayor’s offers to join with the district on education reforms.

“This talk of partnership is overblown and overstated,” she said. “In order for us to partner, we need to work as a team.”

joel.rubin@latimes.com

duke.helfand@latimes.com