Villaraigosa joins rally in support of schools resolution

[UPDATE at 5:35 p.m.: The Board of Education voted 6-1 for the proposal after nearly four hours of debate.]

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa added his voice to a rally in support of a plan to give charter schools access to 50 new schools scheduled to open over the next four years in the Los Angeles Unified School District.

Villaraigosa spoke outside district headquarters before a crowd of at least 2,000 charter-school parents and supporters who drove or were bused in for the occasion. Most wore light blue shirts emblazoned with the slogan: “My Child, My Choice.”

“We’re here today to stand up for our children,” Villaraigosa told a cheering crowd while standing with about 25 students called up to appear with him. He stood under a banner proclaiming a “Parent Revolution,” which is the name of a parent-organizing campaign supported by leading charter school companies.

Third Street was blocked off in the area to accommodate the rally, causing traffic and parking snarls.

The resolution affecting the new schools will be debated starting at 2 p.m. in the district’s packed boardroom.

Outside the meeting room, waiting to get in, were both supporters and opponents of the resolution, which was authored by board member Yolie Flores Aguilar. Labor unions, especially United Teachers Los Angeles, have opposed the measure, which Villaraigosa addressed in remarks that lasted about seven minutes.

“I am pro-union but I am pro-parent as well,” the mayor said. “If workers have rights, then parents ought to have rights too.” He added: “This school board understands that parents are going to have a voice.”

Baldwin Hills parent Ennis Cooper and his wife took the day off from work to attend the rally.

“We are here to support parents’ ability to make choices,” Cooper said.

The crowd outside also included many opponents of the measure, which has been expanded to include persistently low-performing schools. About 200 schools could be affected, although the district already has the authority under federal law to restructure such schools.

 “We don’t think it’s right for the schools to be given to people who just want to make money,” said Robert Hutchins, a volunteer at Crestwood Elementary School in San Pedro. He was reflecting a common sentiment among critics of charter schools, which must be nonprofit in California. Charter schools are independently managed and exempt from district union contracts.

“There’s no question schools need change,” said first-grade teacher Melissa Wiley, who also opposes the resolution. “But local control is the real issue. UTLA has been asking for it all along.”

-- Jason Song and Howard Blume

Comments

[Concerned Teacher]

As the parent of two children who attended LAUSD schools and subsequently went to campuses in the UC system, I am a strong advocate for the role of PUBLIC education. While charter schools may not be run for profit in California, the article states that they are not subject to district union contracts.

Villaraigosa ought to be ashamed of himself for stating that he supports unions. Tell it like it is Tony and don't try to talk out of both sides of your mouth because we union members aren't buying your drivel. You can pander to Los Angeles parents all you want since you obviously realized your support across the state were you to run for governor was lacking.

If you want to try to exert your control over schools by appealing to disenfranchised parents, it is your right. But, please, don't offend the sensibilities of union members who pay our dues both in terms of our efforts in the classrooms and monetarily from our paychecks.

[JB]

The Mayor should stop wasting time on issues that are not his responsibility and start doing the work that he was elected to do, and that is managing the City Of Los Angeles and not the schools. This is what happens when you have elected officials that are more interested in running for the next elected office than doing their job.

[Involved parent]

Charters are LA's best option for our children right now. Teachers can't stand the idea of being held accountable. Under the current system, teachers are free to do whatever they please, with no consequences. Their unions make sure of this, and are responsible for many crimes against children today. UTLA has LAUSD's hands bound and tied. They are totally ineffectual to make any of the deeply needed changes, and won't be until they can get out from under these unions. Charters are doing just that.

I've done extensive research on this for years now. Don't be fooled citizens by the teacher/union rhetoric. They only care for themselves. LAUSD has been in a steady decline for about thirty years. They can't turn it around under the current system. The system must be changed. Charters are making extroardinary progress in retaining students. LAUSD has left half of our kids behind, for too long, and there are hundreds of thousands who never graduated, and dropped out. Our prisons hold 75% of LAUSD victims, and there are many more wandering our streets, addicted to drugs, gangbanging, commiting crimes, and draining our Social Services. There will be nothing left of our once great city if we don't turn the tides on education.

[chin]

Finally, someone has had enough with the trickery and manipulations of the monopoly that is the LA Teachers Union.

They have gathered enough entitlements and benefits that should last them throughout their lifetimes and their children's lifetimes while the rest of us are left with barely-literate young adults and the the huge bill to finance their comfortable retirements.

This may well be the end of the gravy train for those losers. Now they must work, as everyone else, for their paycheck.

[ann]

what is intrinsically superior about charter schools when compared to LA unified public schools? do all charter school teachers enter the classroom with at least a master's degree in the subjects they teach from prestigious universities? Do all charter school teachers motivate all their students to academically excel all the time? what is the difference? the difference is charter schools is the current euphemism for segregation. Charter schools don't have to take students with learning disabilities or behavior problems or mental retardation.

[Paul Troon]

The union has way too much political power over education in this city. We need a decentralized system that allows parents to decide what's best for our kids. Charter schools allow parents to have an alternative to the union dominated system that looks out for the union members first and foremost. It's a vicious circle right now where the union supports pro-union politicians who in turn will raise the salary and benefits for teachers union employees.

This hypocritical mutual back scratching system does not benefit students and if the current system supplied the education they promised they would have nothing to worry about from non-profit charter schools.

[Concerned Taxpayer]

Exactly. The argument of teachers always comes back to "district union contracts", not students! For once, the board has done something for ALL education. Students and parents do not care whether is a charter, magnet, or a public school, the bottom line is student achievement and public choice, not union contracts and jobs.

[Donald]

At risk of making a hasty generalization, from my observations, the issue of education reform is dictated too much by impassioned and idealistic rhetoric that speciously presents the superlative as the average.

I don't understand why there is such an alarm over poor inner city schools having poor test scores and affluent schools having good test scores; that our k-12 school system (which is compulsory regardless of a student's capital) should have just as good test scores in science and math as their Asian/Eurasian counterparts(who have a system that culls only the most academically strong and leaves the rest to a vocation track).

Bottom line - the price of an inclusive education system is lower standards: the price of an exclusive education system, although benefiting from higher standards, will be children left behind and the reneging of an American dream.