Next L.A. Schools Chief Gets New Powers Too

The next superintendent of Los Angeles schools is likely to be the most powerful schools chief in the history of the system. This CEO, who runs an agency larger than the city of Los Angeles, won’t need anyone’s permission to hire senior staff, bring on consultants and sign big-money contracts for everything from buying plastic utensils to building schools. And the new superintendent will be much more difficult to fire.

While most attention has been focused on increased powers granted to the mayor in legislation signed into law recently, the changes it makes to the superintendent’s role are just as sweeping.

This new reality will begin Jan. 1, pending an expected legal challenge, and is among the more experimental aspects of the reform plan advanced by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.

Critics have long maintained that the Los Angeles Unified School District’s superintendent has been hampered by micromanaging from board members beholden to the constituents who elected them. And a remedy was very intentionally built into the Villaraigosa-backed legislation.

The next superintendent will have “more executive authority,� said Thomas Saenz, counsel to the mayor and a primary architect of the new order. “This superintendent will be more of a CEO, with the ability to manage day-to-day operations without interference from the school board.�

The role of the superintendent is especially important now that current schools chief Roy Romer, 77, has announced that he wants to retire as soon as a successor can be chosen. The selection process is well underway -- a search committee met in private last weekend and plans to meet again today to interview candidates. A shortlist of finalists is expected to be forwarded to the school board next week.

Some observers have wondered why anyone would want a job that is not only impossibly difficult but suddenly a political minefield as well, with the mayor and the school board at odds. But Romer proved over the last six years that progress is possible, and his successor will have more muscle than he did.

Until now, the elected seven-member board has been the superintendent’s boss. Given shifting alliances, even a request from one board member was something a superintendent would pay attention to.

Under the new law, Assembly Bill 1381, the superintendent has the power to make more decisions without heeding board input.

The superintendent’s expanded jurisdiction applies to running the school-construction program, hiring senior management staff, seeking state waivers for new programs, assigning principals, signing contracts and making necessary but routine budget actions.

“I’m not sure that it’s enough power, but it’s certainly an improvement,� said Caprice Young, who heads the California Charter Schools Assn. and was a member of the school board that hired Romer.

She recalled Romer’s having to spend “60 to 70% of the time in school board meetings or preparing for meetings.� The next superintendent will have “more power over the things that matter while the school board focuses on governance issues rather than sporks versus forks -- or plastic pouches versus wax carton juice boxes.�

Board members could, of course, continue to discuss any budget item or any contract, and request any information. But board members would have no greater legal claim than an ordinary citizen for detailed budget information. And except with major budget categories, the superintendent would not have to obey the board’s wishes on how to spend the money.

Romer has some enhanced authority through his personal employment contract -- especially when it comes to managing the building of 160 new schools. Officials wanted the district to respond quickly to construction bids in a tight market, so Romer can approve a project as large as $45 million and then get official board consent later.

He also can approve contracts up $250,000 without advance permission from board members.

The new rules make such authority -- and then some -- a matter of permanent law, not changeable policy.

But is this framework an overcorrection? Has the mayor created an unaccountable superintendent?

To address this concern, the mayor’s team refined the role of the school district’s inspector general. District officials already choose to employ an inspector general as an official watchdog. Under the new law, having an inspector general remains voluntary, but the board cannot trim his budget or terminate his contract without cause.

“Now there is a very, very strong incentive for the school board members to hire an inspector general,� said Saenz, of the mayor’s office. “Without one, they have much more restricted access to information about contracting.�

Romer said this approach asks too much of the inspector general, whose job “is to look for a certain kind of fraud and abuse.�

When it comes to evaluating the decisions of the superintendent, the ultimate and appropriate authority should be the mayor, said Saenz.

“First and foremost, the superintendent will answer to the mayor,� he said. “This will be an improved system because instead of a shifting [board] majority of four that essentially determines what the superintendent is going to do, an individual dominant voice -- the mayor’s -- has been added. The superintendent will have no difficulty deciding: ‘Who is the one voice I should listen to?’ �

That might be how things will work, especially under a mayor with the political skills of Villaraigosa, but such dominance is not explicit in the law. To fire the next superintendent, for example, would first require a majority decision of the school board. Then the decision would proceed to the new council of mayors, on which Villaraigosa will sit along with representatives from 26 other cities and the five county supervisors. Villaraigosa will control 80% of the vote because 80% of the school district is within the city of Los Angeles. But it would require a 90% tally to confirm the sacking.

Thus, firing the superintendent would require the concurrence of numerous elected officials from assorted jurisdictions.

The same scenario applies to the hiring of superintendents as of Jan. 1, but that’s not how Romer’s successor will be selected. That process is going forward under the old system -- with the school board firmly in charge. This timing has created consternation in City Hall, where the mayor insists on an immediate role. But until the law takes effect, Villaraigosa remains on the outside looking in -- and his new law is likely to make the board’s choice harder for him to supplant.

Some parts of the law add complexity and uncertainty to the new power equation. The cities of southeast L.A. County, for example, will have veto power over the person the superintendent chooses to run their particular region of schools. The provision was part of a compromise to win the votes of legislators from that area.

“That is a breathtaking loss of autonomy for superintendent,� said district general counsel Kevin Reed, “that he has to consult with city councils before he can make an appointment that is so key to his academic program.�

In Reed’s view, the new authority is outweighed by the potential for confusion and divisiveness. He noted that the bill retains for the school board the responsibility of collective bargaining with unions: “So the superintendent controls the budget, but the school board controls collective bargaining.�

There are also other splits of power. The superintendent controls most decisions over school construction, but not the power to force the sale of private property for school construction. That stills rests with the board.

There also are potential contradictions: The bill grants the superintendent specific authority to assign principals, but in another section keeps jurisdiction over union employees with the board -- and principals belong to a union. The bill also talks of promulgating more local control, including the right of school communities to choose their own principal.

The teachers union -- which joined with the mayor on his legislation -- exercised substantial influence on where the superintendent’s new powers are limited. The schools chief cannot, for example, alter union work rules -- which some critics cast as an impediment to reform. Those critics worry that the superintendent will have supreme day-to-day authority over the mundane but would be handcuffed in advancing transformative change.

Despite the more powerful superintendent, union leaders insist the law also enables them to push successfully for local control of schools.

A self-described union ally on the school board disagreed.

“UTLA has signed on to have an even more powerful superintendent,� said Jon Lauritzen. “And yet, they’ve been arguing consistently that Roy Romer is too powerful.�

School district attorney Reed foresees trouble ahead.

“All we can do is pray that we have smart and wise people on the school board and in the person of the superintendent,� he said. “This splitting of accountability and authority creates an opportunity for conflict and tension.�

[email protected]