CITY COUNCIL WANTS REPORT ON LAUSD BUILDING PLANS.

Byline: Rick Orlov Staff Writer

In a bold challenge to Los Angeles school officials, the Los Angeles City Council on Wednesday called for a report on where the school district plans to build new campuses.

The 12-0 council vote, however, masked concerns over whether city intervention would result in a delay in finding sites for and building the 100 new elementary, middle and high schools the Los Angeles Unified School District needs.

School officials have acknowledged failing to keep city officials aware of their plans and have promised to be more open even though the district has nearly unlimited authority in determining where a new school can be built.

``My office is getting calls from people who are concerned about the impact of a district decision and what it would do to their property,'' Councilman Mark Ridley-Thomas said. ``It is simply unacceptable for us to not be informed so we can determine the impact on existing property and plans for development.''

Ridley-Thomas said the calls were promoted by notifications sent to property owners that the district was looking to build a school in that area.

``This is not only my district,'' Ridley-Thomas said. ``It is in the Valley, in the Eastside, in the harbor (area). It is citywide.''

But Council members Rita Walters and Jackie Goldberg - both of whom served on the Board of Education before they were elected to the council - cautioned against trying to block the school board.

``There is an awful lot of Nimbyism out there,'' Walters said, referring to people opposing schools in their area. ``I never thought I'd see it with children, but the truth is they don't want those little critters out there.''

Goldberg said she has no problems discussing the issue with school board members but warned of dangers.

``Siting schools is the worst thing you'll ever want to do in your entire life,'' Goldberg said. ``You are talking about putting schools in areas where there is almost no empty space.''

Goldberg suggested the city try to create a task force of staff to work with the school district on coordinating planning. Council President John Ferrarro said he tried such an approach years ago but was rebuffed by the district.

Mayor Richard Riordan voiced problems with the council involvement in the decision-making.

``The school district is 25 years behind in building schools,'' Riordan said. ``Not only are they not building for the future, but they aren't building enough to catch up with the past and what we need now.''

Officials from the state Superintendent of Public Instruction said it would be a voluntary move by the school district to meet with city officials. State law gives the district sole responsibility for determining where a school is to be located and wide powers to acquire the property.

School board president Genethia Hayes said last week that she recognized a communication failure with city officials and will try to develop a process to deal with the concerns of council members.

``It is unfortunate there was no process in place, but we are taking steps to repair that,'' Hayes said, adding the district would contact each council member.

Former school board member Bobbi Fiedler supported the Ridley-Thomas proposal.

``The council members have a constituency and once the school is built, they will have to live with the consequences,'' Fiedler said. ``It creates and enormous burden for the people who would be affected.''

Former Assemblywoman Paula Boland, who carried the legislation allowing for splitting up the school district, said such an action should have been taken years ago.

``It's about time the council or someone took responsibility,'' Boland said. ``What's a shame is that the new charter didn't give more controls to the city over the school district.''