LAUSD Incumbent Scott Schmerelson on Governance

“I’m concerned by what I’m hearing from school sites about a re-centralization of decision making in this district and the reports about the loss of academic freedom to a program called I-Ready.”

– BD3 Incumbent Scott Schmerelson

Unlike BD7’s incumbent Tanya Ortiz Franklin, Scott Schmerelson has been willing to engage with the voters as he seeks reelection. So far this campaign season he has participated in the debate held by the Lake Balboa and Winnetka Neighborhood Councils and answered questions about PROP-39 Co-Locations for my ongoing Candidate Forum series.

For November LAUSD candidates were asked five questions centered around how the District is governed. An introduction to this subject along with answers from other candidates can be found in the article LAUSD Candidate Forum: Governance.

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

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

The bureaucracy of the LA Unified School District is supposed to serve the students in all of our schools and in an era of impending budget cuts we owe it to those students that we make sure the bureaucracy supports their learning instead of impeding it.

I fundamentally believe that school based decision making is crucial to academic success. It is the principal, teachers, parents, and community members that should be making decisions about what goes on on their campus and it is the job of the district bureaucracy to support that.

Sometimes in this district the tail that is Beaudry ends up wagging the dog with bulletins and memorandum demanding wholesale change. This is not how it should be and is developing into a difference of opinion between myself and the Superintendent.

Management of the schools should be from the bottom up, not the top down.

• 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.”?

As I said above, It's very important that schools be given more autonomy on how teaching and learning happens at local schools. Schools have different cultures and unique needs in how they deal with their students and their community. I fundementally believe it's up to the school community to come together and make decisions on the best way of learning for our kids. The rules and regulations of the State of California must be followed, of course, however, the rest of the decisions should be made at the local level. I’m concerned by what I’m hearing from school sites about a re-centralization of decision making in this district and the reports about the loss of academic freedom to a program called I-Ready.

• 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?

I do believe that the public should have a part in the evaluation of the superintendent. There needs to be the ability on the part of district stakeholders to comment and to suggest.

• Should the number of Board Districts be increased beyond the existing seven? SPLIT

This is a much more difficult question that it seems.

If I take Board District 3 for an example I do feel that I'm able to successfully communicate with all 105 schools in Board District 3. I meet with representatives of the Community through Neighborhood Councils and I schedule visits to our schools every week. I have visited all 105 schools in BD 3. So, in that sense, no, I think the distribution of schools in the seven board areas can be managed through diligent calendar management and scheduling.

Adding Board Members would also present a problem in that School Board Meetings are already long and cumbersome and it's harder to have harder to have the conversations necessary for agreements.

Having said that, it is crazy that I represent over 425,000 people. How can I or any School Board Member anywhere hear the voices of 425,000 people and be responsive. Democracy demands that we hear the voices of those whom we represent but with so many constituents, I fear we spend way more time solving problems that might have been much better handled if we were working in a smaller universe.

Call me split on the idea right now.

• If elected would you introduce the proposed “Board Meeting Accessibility to the Public” resolution? YES

Ever since I became a board member I have urged the School Board to have meetings in different parts of the city so that there could be more public access to these meetings. For example, I have repeatedly proposed we go to Van Nuys in the north district. Van Nuys City Hall has all the facilities that the Board needs, it was equipped for the City Council to have meetings that are well publicized and with a live video stream able to be shown to the public.

Before the pandemic hit we were all set to begin a pilot program of having board meetings and committee meetings in different parts of the city and I volunteered the valley to be the first of this pilot starting at Van Nuys City Hall. I envisioned having parents, teachers, students, and local community members becoming able and willing partners in attending school board meetings, something not possible for most people when we meet at Beaudry.

I will again push this on the new school year the idea of having district meetings all around the city, so, yes, I strongly and enthusiastically support this proposal.

____________________________

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.