EDITORIAL : REFORM IN REVERSE; ADDING 2 MEMBERS TO L.A. SCHOOL BOARD IS A STEP BACKWARD.

THE City Council-appointed Charter Reform Commission got it all wrong last week when it recommended adding two members to the seven-member Los Angeles Board of Education.

Los Angeles doesn't need more school board members. It needs to break up the Los Angeles Unified School District and create new school boards to run separate districts.

That's the way to bring public education closer to the voters and reconnect schools with the people. Adding two members to the board would be an exercise in tokenism that only would create more politicians and political infighting.

One of the fundamental problems with the dismally performing LAUSD is that it is so large that it's virtually ungovernable.

Adding two board members wouldn't address that issue. Instead, increasing the size probably would make matters worse, since the newcomers surely would want to emulate their colleagues by establishing themselves as czars of their own territories. That would make the district even more unmanageable.

Further, the superintendent would be confronted with the unenviable job of reporting to nine micromanagers, none of whom has a districtwide perspective unless matters dear to the hearts of the teachers union, the administrators union or groups representing nonteaching employees are involved.

And if that's not enough, consider this report by Raphael Sonenshein, the commission's executive director:

``The staff analysis is that there is not compelling evidence that increasing the size of the school board would create a more responsive school district or contribute significantly to school reform.''

Meanwhile, Commission Chairman David Kieffer said that there was a consensus on the panel for increasing the pay of board members, who receive $24,000 annually. Some commissioners have suggested linking board members' salaries to those of teachers (about $45,000 a year), principals ($80,000 a year) or allowing automatic cost-of-living adjustments.

That's bad news, too.

Service on the Board of Education isn't supposed to be a full-time job. Board members, who constantly whine about the long hours they put in, would find that they could accomplish more in less time by concentrating on policy matters and stop trying to act as mini-superintendents on their own political turf.

Frankly, we aren't enthusiastic about using charter reform as a vehicle for tinkering with the LAUSD. The appointed and elected charter commissions have their hands full trying to overhaul City Hall.

But if education is going to be on the agenda, the ``reformers'' shouldn't restrict themselves to fattening benefits for school board members. They should concentrate on responsible proposals to improve the quality of education.

So how about opening up the discussion to include real reform, such as breaking up the LAUSD?