School cuts put future at risk

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Year of Education, you might have noticed, is not off to an A-plus start.

Education Week magazine, in fact, gave California a D-plus in school funding, saying the state ranks 43rd and spends nearly $2,000 less per pupil than the national average. And that was before Conan reached for his sword and proposed a $4.8-billion whack to help close a gaping state budget shortfall.

School districts across the state are reeling, with Long Beach closing an elementary school, L.A. Unified wondering how to manage an estimated $560-million deficit, and Rialto authorizing layoff notices for 305 employees, as my colleague Jason Song reported.

In other words, the state’s most valuable resource, more than 6 million public school students, is also its most imperiled.

“What do you tell [students] when they show up for class and their teacher is no longer there?” asked one of my readers, lamenting the fact that his wife is a first-year teacher who loves the mission but could lose her job in Temple City Unified. “What do you tell the teachers that are left [behind]? What happens to the quality of education. . . ?”

His wife was nervous about drawing more attention to her precarious standing, but others in Temple City were happy to talk about the never-ending challenges.

I met with them Thursday evening at the San Gabriel Elks Lodge, site of a banquet honoring parents and other volunteers who go out of their way to support schools that rank among the best in Southern California.

“We’re in a constant state of trying to do more with less,” said Kristi Ferntheil, a Temple City High School teacher.

She and Deb Maurey, a seventh-grade teacher at Oak Avenue Intermediate School and current leader of the teachers union, were quick to acknowledge that they’re lucky to be in Temple City Unified.

The students, about 6 in 10 of whom are Asian, come from middle-income families with high expectations.

(The banquet theme was “Fiesta,” with a mostly Asian student string ensemble wearing sombreros and playing songs including “La Bamba” for a mostly white audience -- a snapshot of recent San Gabriel Valley demographic history.)

“If I were in L.A. Unified,” Maurey said, with its “top-heavy” administrative staff, “I’m sure I’d feel more afraid.”

Still, she acknowledged, it’s entirely possible that some teachers will lose their jobs in Temple City.

How many?

I caught up with Supt. Joan Hillard in the fiesta night food line, and her frustration was as thick as the guacamole.

An educator since 1967, Hillard has been meeting with staff and school board members to figure out how to get by with an estimated $3.3 million less this year and next for seven schools and 5,700 students.

That may not sound like much, but it’s roughly 10% of the total budget, said Hillard, who will step down in June. Along with an anticipated funding loss because of expected declining enrollment in kindergarten through third grade, it means seven teachers could lose their jobs, even if the district uses money from its rainy-day fund.

Hillard said district staff has already been stripped thanks to a funding decrease during the administration of Gov. Gray Davis. So this time, teachers will go, class sizes will grow, a vacant janitorial job will not be filled and there will be roughly $200,000 less for paint, construction paper, calculators and other classroom supplies.

“It’s very difficult to do any long-term planning,” she said, when school funding rides the boom and bust economic wave in California. “I always tell people I wish I were Tinker Bell, with fairy dust to sprinkle across all of public education. But it’s not as simple as that.”

Ted Mitchell, former president of Occidental College, knows what she’s talking about. I asked Mitchell, a member of the state Board of Education and chief of the NewSchools Venture Fund -- whose mission is to boost opportunities for low-income students -- what he’d do if he had that fairy dust Hillard was talking about.

Here’s his short list:

First, local school districts would have more flexibility in deciding how to spend money, instead of being locked into state-imposed formulas. “A superintendent could hire two new art teachers if she wants, or she could hire English language tutors or increase the school day by an hour. Whatever she and teachers and parents believe is in the best interest of their students.”

Second, in fat years, schools would set aside surplus revenue so economic slumps wouldn’t have a catastrophic impact.

Third, the state should invest in a better system for analyzing what works, so money can be shifted from what doesn’t work to what does.

Fourth, more money would be directed toward students with greater needs.

What about more money, period, I asked?

“Spending more money, without the structural reforms we’re talking about, is unlikely to produce the improvements we need,” Mitchell said.

He’s probably right about that.

But it’s also true that layoffs, school closures and other cutbacks are no formula for success in a state that should be ashamed of both its national ranking and its lack of political leadership in reversing the trend.

--

steve.lopez@latimes.com