LAUSD Candidate ByRoN Gutierrez on Governance

“I totally agree with the foundational principal that the school board serves the electorate.”

– BD3 Candidate ByRoN Gutierrez

ByRoN Gutierrez is running against incumbent Scott Schmerelson in LAUSD’s Board District 3, which covers most of the western San Fernando Valley. As part of my ongoing Candidate Forum series, Gutierrez was asked five questions about how the District is governed. For the introduction to this subject along with answers from other candidates, please see the article LAUSD Candidate Forum: Governance.

The following are the candidate’s responses, printed exactly how he provided them with the exception of some minor formatting edits:

Would you agree with the statement: “The elected LAUSD Board is responsible for setting policy. The job of the Superintendent is to ensure that the bureaucracy follows this policy.”? YES

In principle, a very clear division should exist between the Board which sets policy and the Superintendent who manages day to day operations. In practice this is an area which definitely needs some work.

For context I fed this question into Google Bard, I thought the breakdown was very good so I include it here:

Google Bard (start)

Yes, I agree with the statement that the elected LAUSD Board is responsible for setting policy, and the job of the Superintendent is to ensure that the bureaucracy follows this policy.

The LAUSD Board of Education is the governing body of the Los Angeles Unified School District. It is made up of seven members who are elected by the residents of the district. The Board is responsible for setting the overall direction of the district, including developing and approving policies, setting the budget, and overseeing the Superintendent.

The Superintendent is the chief executive officer of the LAUSD. He or she is responsible for implementing the policies set by the Board and managing the day-to-day operations of the district. The Superintendent is

also responsible for hiring and firing staff, developing and implementing programs, and managing the district's budget.

In order for the LAUSD to function effectively, it is important that there is a clear division of responsibilities between the Board and the Superintendent. The Board should focus on setting policy and holding the

Superintendent accountable for implementing that policy. The Superintendent should focus on managing the day-to-day operations of the district and ensuring that the bureaucracy follows the Board's policies.

When this division of responsibilities works well, it can lead to a more effective and efficient school district. However, when there is confusion or conflict between the Board and the Superintendent, it can lead to problems such as policy gridlock, lack of accountability, and a decline in morale among staff.

In the case of the LAUSD, there has been a history of tension between the Board and the Superintendent. This tension has been exacerbated by the district's large size and complex organizational structure. However, in recent years, there have been efforts to improve communication and cooperation between the Board and the Superintendent. These efforts have led to some progress, but there is still more work to be done.

Overall, the statement that the elected LAUSD Board is responsible for setting policy, and the job of the Superintendent is to ensure that the bureaucracy follows this policy, is a sound principle of governance. However, it is important that this principle is implemented in a way that is effective and efficient. This requires a clear understanding of the roles and responsibilities of the Board and the Superintendent, as well as a commitment to communication and cooperation between the two bodies.

Google Bard (end)

Do you agree with the statement: “The bureaucracy of the LAUSD is too big to be managed effectively.”? YES

Absolutely 100% especially when you compare achievement stats with smaller districts !

My dealings with LAUSD have given me a greater understanding and respect for the works of Franz Kafka.

Teachers and administrators on the school site have the most direct and

immediate impact on student outcomes and parent engagement. But their voices and those of engaged parents seem to be lost when up against the layers of LAUSD bureaucracy.

My favorite is when you know the name of the LAUSD director you need

approval from but they refuse to engage with you in ANY meaningful way. Easy to ignore voices when they have no forum from which to speak.

Again I thought the Google Bard parsing of this question insightful, so I include it here:

Google Bard (start)

Whether or not the bureaucracy of the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) is too big to be managed effectively is a complex question with no easy answer. There are strong arguments to be made on both sides of the issue.

Arguments in favor of the statement

• The LAUSD is the second-largest school district in the United States, with over 600,000 students and 70,000 employees. This large size can make it difficult to coordinate and manage all of the different departments and programs within the district.

• The LAUSD has a complex organizational structure, with multiple layers of bureaucracy. This can make it difficult for parents, teachers, and other stakeholders to get the information they need or to have their voices heard.

• The LAUSD has a history of financial mismanagement, which has led to budget cuts and layoffs. This can make it difficult to provide adequate resources to all of the students in the district.

Arguments against the statement

• The LAUSD's large size allows it to offer a wide range of programs and services to its students. This includes specialized programs for students with special needs, as well as extracurricular activities and other enrichment opportunities.

• The LAUSD's complex organizational structure can help to ensure that there is accountability and

oversight within the district. This can help to prevent corruption and other wrongdoing.

• The LAUSD has taken steps to improve its financial management in recent years. These steps include developing a multi-year budget plan and implementing new financial controls.

Ultimately, the question of whether or not the LAUSD's bureaucracy is too big to be managed effectively is a matter of opinion. There is no clear consensus on this issue, and there are valid arguments to be made on both sides.

However, it is clear that the LAUSD's large size and complex organizational structure can pose challenges for managing the district effectively. The district must continue to work to improve its organizational efficiency and transparency in order to better serve its students and the community.

Google Bard (end)

Do you think that the evaluation of the Superintendent’s job performance is something that the school board should do in full view of the public? YES

Wow! Definitive answer from Google Bard with which I completely agree!

Transparency, accountability, public trust, and community engagement. Such a simple formula !

Google Bard (start)

Yes, I believe that the evaluation of the LAUSD Superintendent's job performance should be done in full view of the public. There are several reasons for this:

• Transparency: The public has a right to know how their tax dollars are being spent and how the school district is being run. Evaluating the Superintendent's job performance in public is a way to ensure that the public is kept informed about the district's leadership.

• Accountability: The Superintendent is an accountable to the public. Evaluating their job performance in public helps to ensure that they are held accountable for their actions and decisions.

• Public trust: Open and transparent evaluation of the Superintendent's job performance can help to build public trust in the school district. When the public can see that the evaluation process is fair and impartial, they are more likely to trust the district's leadership.

• Community engagement: Evaluating the Superintendent's job performance in public can be a way to engage the community in the school district's decision-making process. When the public is given an opportunity to provide input on the evaluation, they are more likely to feel invested in the district's success.

Of course, there are some potential challenges to conducting the evaluation of the LAUSD Superintendent's job performance in public. For example, it is important to ensure that the evaluation process is fair and impartial, and that it does not become a political witch hunt. Additionally, it is important to be mindful of the Superintendent's privacy rights.

However, I believe that the benefits of conducting the evaluation in public outweigh the challenges. Transparency, accountability, public trust, and community engagement are all important values that can be enhanced by open and transparent evaluation of the Superintendent's job performance.

Google Bard (end)

Should the number of Board Districts be increased beyond the existing seven? NO

We need less bureaucracy not more. We need existing board members pulling together not against one another.

From an economy of scales perspective we are not gaining any efficiency by having one big giant LAUSD, might be time to consider breaking it up.

From a cost perspective, until student achievement scores improve significantly we need to focus monies on students and those teachers / administrators with direct contact with students.

Google Bard (start)

There are several arguments in favor of increasing the number of LAUSD Board Districts beyond the existing seven.

• Representation: The LAUSD is a large and diverse district, with over 600,000 students from a variety of backgrounds. Increasing the number of Board Districts would ensure that the district is better represented in terms of geography, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status.

• Accessibility: With seven Board Districts, it can be difficult for parents and other stakeholders to have their voices heard. Increasing the number of Board Districts would make it easier for people to attend Board meetings and communicate with their representatives.

• Accountability: A larger Board would be more accountable to the public. With more members, it would be more difficult for any one individual or group to dominate the Board.

• Expertise: A larger Board would have access to a wider range of expertise. This could help the Board to make more informed decisions about the district's future.

However, there are also some arguments against increasing the number of Board Districts.

• Cost: Increasing the number of Board Districts would increase the cost of running the district. This would likely lead to cuts to other programs and services.

• Efficiency: A larger Board could be less efficient than a smaller Board. More members could mean more meetings, more debate, and more difficulty reaching consensus.

• Fragmentation: A larger Board could be more fragmented, with members vying for power and influence. This could make it difficult to get things done.

Ultimately, the decision of whether or not to increase the number of LAUSD Board Districts is a complex one. There are strong arguments to be made on both sides of the issue. The Board should carefully consider all of the pros and cons before making a decision.

In addition to the arguments listed above, it is also important to consider the specific needs of the LAUSD community. If the community believes that increasing the number of Board Districts would be beneficial,

then the Board should move forward with this proposal. However, if the community believes that the current system is working well, then the Board should not make any changes.

The Board should also consider the potential impact of increasing the number of Board Districts on the district's budget, efficiency, and fragmentation. If the Board believes that these impacts would be

manageable, then it should move forward with the proposal. However, if the Board believes that these impacts would be too great, then it should not make any changes.

Ultimately, the decision of whether or not to increase the number of LAUSD Board Districts is a matter of judgment. The Board should carefully weigh all of the factors involved before making a decision.

Google Bard (end)

Do you agree with the statement: “The bureaucracy of the LAUSD is too big to be managed effectively.”? Mostly YES

The proposed resolution, as written, needs to be cleaned up. But I totally agree with the foundational principal that the school board serves the electorate. That meeting times should prioritize engagement of that electorate, which to me seems common sense. But see no issue in having it officially called out in record.

And like always ran the proposed resolution through bard to help with understanding.

Google Bard (start)

Sure, here is an amplified version of the message in the copy, specifically appealing to parents of Los Angeles public school students:

As parents of Los Angeles public school students, your voice matters.

The Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) has a stated goal of "parent and community engagement." But how can you engage if you're unable to attend Board meetings due to inconvenient scheduling or limited seating?

Current meeting practices hinder parent involvement.

Regularly scheduled meetings during school hours and bus transportation times: This makes it difficult for working parents, who make up a majority of LAUSD families, to attend.

Late start times: Meetings often begin at 1:00 PM, further limiting attendance for parents with other commitments.

Inconsistent room capacity: The LAUSD Board Room can only accommodate 155 people, often leaving parents unable to attend.

Excessive meeting lengths: Meetings can last seven or more hours, making it challenging for parents to stay engaged throughout.

Unfair speaker access: Outside organizations may manipulate access to the meeting, limiting representation of diverse viewpoints.

Proposed solutions to ensure parent engagement:

Reschedule meetings to accommodate parents' schedules: Meetings should not conflict with school hours, bus transportation times, or commute times from the furthest school in the district.

Start half of all meetings at 6:00 PM: This provides an alternative time for parents who cannot attend during the day.

Hold budget-related meetings on weekends: This allows parents to participate in the crucial decision-making process regarding their children's education.

Accommodate overflow attendees: Provide a separate room with a remote feed of the meeting and access to speak to the Board.

Limit meeting lengths to four hours: This encourages concise presentations and ensures parents can stay engaged throughout.

Ensure balanced speaker representation: Both sides of a resolution should be represented on the speaker list.

Make your voice heard.

By implementing these changes, the LAUSD can truly foster parent engagement and ensure that all voices are heard in shaping the future of our children's education.

Google Bard (end)

Do you have any other thoughts that you would like to express about this subject?

I am the Software Engineering guy, who believes student engagement with technology will inspire them to great things.

We are approaching a period of time where Generation Alpha will have a greater understanding of technology than their teachers, but we cling to the dogmatic ways of doing the same things expecting the results to change, to magically become better.

It scares me that technologies like AI are becoming another access divide.

It scares me that it takes a world wide pandemic for LAUSD to finally adopt providing EVERY student with a computer.

It saddens me that access to fiber internet is not universal and favors those of priviledge.

Lifelong learning comes from minor achievements building towards larger and larger achievements.

Unless we invest in providing access to those with limited options the schism between those who have and those who have not will continue to grow.

Time to act is now. We cannot continue to do the same things year upon year and hope for better results.

Apologize for the long response to this thread. But for these questions Google Bard provided perfect context, so felt they should be included.

____________________________

Carl Petersen is a parent advocate for public education, particularly for students with special education needs, who serves as the Education Chair for the Northridge East Neighborhood Council. As a Green Party candidate in LAUSD’s District 2 School Board race, he was endorsed by Network for Public Education (NPE) Action. Dr. Diane Ravitch has called him “a valiant fighter for public schools in Los Angeles.” For links to his blogs, please visit www.ChangeTheLAUSD.com. Opinions are his own.