'BACKDOOR' PAY HIKE ROMER MOVES TO GIVE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS 2ND BOOST.

Byline: Harrison Sheppard Staff Writer

Without seeking school board approval, schools Superintendent Roy Romer plans to give extra raises to many principals and assistant principals on top of the one-year 14.5 percent pay package that was just negotiated, LAUSD officials said Monday.

Romer is relying on a 4-year-old study that proposed adjustments to salaries of school-based administrators to achieve what critics labeled a backdoor, me-too raise that hikes principals' pay as much and in some cases more than the 15.3 percent package recently won by teachers.

The extra raises - costing $1.9 million on top of the $18 million price tag for the new principals contract - are based on a 1997 study that recommended raising, and lowering, the salaries of principals and assistant principals based on the size of staff, special programs, athletics and other demands.

Romer, who has no plans to impose the salary-cuts part of the study, dismissed criticism of his action and insisted the only board approval he needs is for funding the raises since they are not part of the contract with administrators.

``It makes our compensation more accurate,'' said Romer. ``It lines it with the way you should pay somebody in the complexity of the job and the size of the job.''

The administrators contract will come before the school board tonight. The salary range in the proposed contract, before this latest increase plan, is between $48,100 and $103,000, with an average of $90,300.

``How come nobody's screaming this is going to bankrupt the district when it's the administrators?'' asked United Teachers Los Angeles President Day Higuchi. ``I think the (study) is kind of a sly way for them to get the me-too.

``Somehow or another giving teachers a raise is always a trigger for a crescendo of crying that it's going to break the school district,'' the union president said. ``And then the administrators get a raise and nobody says a peep.''

The new adjustments average about a 1 percent increase, based on the total salary pool for principals, but in practice will be substantially more for individuals because only roughly one-third of the administrators will receive raises.

School board member David Tokofsky called the move ``political gamesmanship at its best.''

``It's not going to fool most rank-and-file teachers but it would've been better to build teamwork in this district, to have done this a different way,'' he said.

Tokofsky added that the proposal gives a greater incentive for principals to work at larger schools, even though smaller schools tend to produce higher student achievement.

Romer countered, however, that larger schools are more difficult to manage and thus their principals should be better compensated.

The regular contract will come before the school board tonight, but this provision will not be in that contract. Instead, Romer said he believes he does not need board approval for these salary adjustments, except within the context of approving next year's budget as a whole.

The 1997 study had recommended adjusted salaries - both increases and decreases - for principals and assistant principals based on particular difficulties at their individual schools, such as the size of the staff and number of special programs like Title One and athletics.

The School-Based Administrator Compensation Study was performed by Ewing & Company, a human resources consultant in Orange. It was first released in March 1997 but not implemented at the time because of budget shortfalls.

The district implemented part of the Ewing study in the 1999-00 school year, affecting about 500 assistant principals at middle and high schools. District officials now plan to implement the rest, affecting about 1,200 principals and assistant principals at all levels as of July 1.

Some of the administrators will receive salary raises and some will stay the same. Some positions will receive lower salaries, but a grandfather clause protects the people currently holding those positions from receiving less money. The lower salary level will kick in after the current employee leaves the position.

Officials are working on updating the study and hope to have an implementation plan in place by mid-June.

School board member Valerie Fields supports the study, saying it is a question of fairness. She also said the district far too often commissions studies and then ignores their recommendations.

``It was gathering dust when I first became a board member,'' Fields said. ``It's time to implement it.''

``The district has had a history of, in many different areas, paying consultants for reports and then sticking them on a shelf someplace. And then paying either the same consultants or other consultants more money for the same or similar reports. That is something that's unacceptable,'' she said.