What's Next for LAUSD/A.B. 1381 and The Mayor's Role
Z.D. CORRECTS MAYOR'S "MISINFORMATION/PROPOGANDA" REGARDING LAUSD (A.B. 1381) FOR THE TV MEDIA (WHO GOT IT WRONG) -- AND -- WHAT'S REALLY NEXT FOR LAUSD AND THE MAYOR:
This Bill is so confusing and non-transparant, it's tough to decipher the actual facts from the Mayor's fiction.
Just saw a story on CBS 2 News regarding what is next for LAUSD/A.B. 1381. Unfortunatley, due to the non-transparancy of the issue, and the Mayor being somewhat delusional as to his authority, Z.D. had to call CBS 2 News to clarify the comments, "Next for The Mayor: Selecting a new LAUSD Superintendent to replace Roy Romer who retires this fall."
HERE'S THE REALITY: The Mayor (and his "Council of Mayors") DOES NOT get to hire or fire the School Superintendent, under any circumstances.
LAUSD selects a candidate, of their own, for School Super. Then The Council of Mayors need a 90% vote (80% Mayor V., plus at least 10%/half of the other Mayors' vote) to ratify (approve) or reject the candidate. If Council of Mayors do not get the 90% needed within 30 days, the LAUSD candidate is automatically approved.
BUT NONE OF THAT IS GONNA MATTER ANYWAY, BECAUSE:
A.B. 1381 won't take effect until January '07. Romer is retiring now, and LAUSD will have a list of candidates this month sometime, and a new School Superintended selected sometime in October (Z.D. predicts based on the most accurate of sources.)
And contrary to Mayor Viagraosa's quote in The Los Angeles Times decalring, "HE would fire any Superintendent that doesn't meet HIS approval", I have some bad news for the Mayor. He (and his Council of Mayors) don't get to HIRE or FIRE nobody!
So if Mayor Tony V., decides he doesn't like the new Superintendent (because it ain't one of his "back pocket" homies) -- his ONLY course of action will be to:
Take taxpayer's money and BUY OUT the remainder of the Super's contract. (And it'll most likely be a four year contract to buy-out.)
EVEN THEN, The Council of Mayors DO NOT get to choose their own LAUSD Superintendent: Again, LAUSD will select another candidate for The Mayors to get 90% vote, to approve or deny.
But, none of this will probably even be an issue, cause the whole A.B. 1381 will probably get overturned by the courts for being non-transparent, not put before a vote of the people (even though the comitte responsible for the Bill said it "must" be put to a vote of the people), and we already know the whole concept is in violation of State Consititutional law. (The Mayor can't oversee the school board.)
JUST GOT OFF THE PHONE (Sept 07, '06) with a Z.D. School source, and spoke last night with Mr. KABC on the air, and look for this, in the next couple weeks:
LAUSD Board Head Marlene Canter will be working with Mayor V. to try and see if they can come to grips with a School Superintendent candidate both can live with.
Now, this won't exactly be so easy, cause LAUSD cares about the best interest of the kids, and the Mayor's main concern is real estate development money. (20 2/3 BILLION in facility/real estate development money for LAUSD, controlled by the Superintendent, for some reason, instead of controlling the hallways and classrooms.)
So maybe this can be good, if the Mayor does what he does best -- real estate development, as in a bunch of new schools to reduce classroom size down to a manageable 25 students per class. (He and his real esate moguls can get rich, but at least the school system would benefit, too.) And let the Superintendent, LAUSD Board, Principals, Teachers and Parents work to improve the standards of education and community/parent involvement at the school level.
So we'll see. The Mayor and Marlene Canter are making nice in the media now, as both sides hedge in case LAUSD wins it's court challenge to toss out A.B. 1381 entirely (so the Mayor needs to be somewhat flexible/bow down to LAUSD, because there really is a good chance the whole thing (A.B. 1381) will be overturned in court.)
And Marlene has to be nice to the Mayor (for now) in case it doesn't get overturned.
Either outcome, looks like the Mayor is kinda on the short end of the stick, for now, but I do feel LAUSD DOES INDEED want to work more with the Mayor, than previously.
Zuma Dogg
Public Advocate of The Community
for L.A. City Council
This Bill is so confusing and non-transparant, it's tough to decipher the actual facts from the Mayor's fiction.
Just saw a story on CBS 2 News regarding what is next for LAUSD/A.B. 1381. Unfortunatley, due to the non-transparancy of the issue, and the Mayor being somewhat delusional as to his authority, Z.D. had to call CBS 2 News to clarify the comments, "Next for The Mayor: Selecting a new LAUSD Superintendent to replace Roy Romer who retires this fall."
HERE'S THE REALITY: The Mayor (and his "Council of Mayors") DOES NOT get to hire or fire the School Superintendent, under any circumstances.
LAUSD selects a candidate, of their own, for School Super. Then The Council of Mayors need a 90% vote (80% Mayor V., plus at least 10%/half of the other Mayors' vote) to ratify (approve) or reject the candidate. If Council of Mayors do not get the 90% needed within 30 days, the LAUSD candidate is automatically approved.
BUT NONE OF THAT IS GONNA MATTER ANYWAY, BECAUSE:
A.B. 1381 won't take effect until January '07. Romer is retiring now, and LAUSD will have a list of candidates this month sometime, and a new School Superintended selected sometime in October (Z.D. predicts based on the most accurate of sources.)
And contrary to Mayor Viagraosa's quote in The Los Angeles Times decalring, "HE would fire any Superintendent that doesn't meet HIS approval", I have some bad news for the Mayor. He (and his Council of Mayors) don't get to HIRE or FIRE nobody!
So if Mayor Tony V., decides he doesn't like the new Superintendent (because it ain't one of his "back pocket" homies) -- his ONLY course of action will be to:
Take taxpayer's money and BUY OUT the remainder of the Super's contract. (And it'll most likely be a four year contract to buy-out.)
EVEN THEN, The Council of Mayors DO NOT get to choose their own LAUSD Superintendent: Again, LAUSD will select another candidate for The Mayors to get 90% vote, to approve or deny.
But, none of this will probably even be an issue, cause the whole A.B. 1381 will probably get overturned by the courts for being non-transparent, not put before a vote of the people (even though the comitte responsible for the Bill said it "must" be put to a vote of the people), and we already know the whole concept is in violation of State Consititutional law. (The Mayor can't oversee the school board.)
JUST GOT OFF THE PHONE (Sept 07, '06) with a Z.D. School source, and spoke last night with Mr. KABC on the air, and look for this, in the next couple weeks:
LAUSD Board Head Marlene Canter will be working with Mayor V. to try and see if they can come to grips with a School Superintendent candidate both can live with.
Now, this won't exactly be so easy, cause LAUSD cares about the best interest of the kids, and the Mayor's main concern is real estate development money. (20 2/3 BILLION in facility/real estate development money for LAUSD, controlled by the Superintendent, for some reason, instead of controlling the hallways and classrooms.)
So maybe this can be good, if the Mayor does what he does best -- real estate development, as in a bunch of new schools to reduce classroom size down to a manageable 25 students per class. (He and his real esate moguls can get rich, but at least the school system would benefit, too.) And let the Superintendent, LAUSD Board, Principals, Teachers and Parents work to improve the standards of education and community/parent involvement at the school level.
So we'll see. The Mayor and Marlene Canter are making nice in the media now, as both sides hedge in case LAUSD wins it's court challenge to toss out A.B. 1381 entirely (so the Mayor needs to be somewhat flexible/bow down to LAUSD, because there really is a good chance the whole thing (A.B. 1381) will be overturned in court.)
And Marlene has to be nice to the Mayor (for now) in case it doesn't get overturned.
Either outcome, looks like the Mayor is kinda on the short end of the stick, for now, but I do feel LAUSD DOES INDEED want to work more with the Mayor, than previously.
Zuma Dogg
Public Advocate of The Community
for L.A. City Council
Posted by Zuma Dogg @ 9/07/2006 10:00:00 PM
13 Comments:
Zuma, just my two cents. If I were elected to the State Assembly, I'd have legislation put together to repeal AB1381 so fast that y'all would have no clue what hit you. On the other hand, if I were the Mayor, I would have a Plan B ready in case the Governor didn't sign the bill into law or it got overturned.
And my Plan B would be two fold. The first part is to endorse and support as many candidates as possible to the state legislature who will be friendly to my cause so that I know I have the votes needed to do the second thing: Change the California Constitution and THEN promulgate an Assembly or Senate bill advocating take over.
Kevin DeLeon has the Mayor and the Speaker's endorsement and blessing, as do a number of other candidates. That's just the way it is. But just because that's the way it is doesn't mean I have to accept the Mayor or Speaker's choice as my elected representative.
I'm just a candidate and I'm not the Mayor. I'm the alternative to what the Mayor thinks is best for my child, me and everybody else just as you are the alternative to what currently sits on the City Council.
Your thoughts?
Somebody representing Kevin de Leon tried to have this video taken off Youtube.
Oh God. You mean THAT's who we're going to have for our Assemblyman? Hell, I'm a Democrat and after seeing that and hearing everything else that came out about Kevin DeLeon in June, I'll DEFINATELY vote for the other candidate!
12:08
That's old shit. As far as I know, he no longer associates with those agendas. Ask him in person.
Didn't you do stupid shit in your college days?
shit happens
It was not this past june
this video is was taken many years ago.
de Leon is a traitor to the U.S.
first impressions never lie
You must be squeaky clean of any sins, right?
That was the past, who gives a shit about his past.
My previous President of US sold arms to Iran, but did I judge him?
NO
Shit happens.
No, I'm pretty sinful. But my allegiance isn't to Mexico.
Why in the hell are taxpayers paying 20B PLUS for 160 schools that will be occupied by illiterate, itinerate, uneducatable, third world. illegal (anchor babies will always be 'ILLEGAL"), underclass miscreants????
Schwarzenegger just signed over 50M for pre school for these third world illegals. What the fuck is going on here, anyway?
Where is the outrage???????
Why in the fuck are we building brand new schools for thousands of illegals who have brokenn all of our laws by crawling over the border to plop out their bastard brats!
This is TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION AND WE NEED TO STOP PAYING TAXES....PERIOD!
Zuma excellent post with great information. This is the propaganda Antonio has been putting out there. Sadly, very rarely will the media actually do their homework and nail him on it.
FYI can you please make your posts not so long and put a link for continuatio in case we want to read more?
Look, stupid shit aside, the behavior is telling. It's disrespectful. It shows that DeLeon is willing to participate in the same sort of behavior that has people pissed off about Antonio and Fabian. He's one of them and his allegiance clearly is not with the people of his Assembly District. It's with Fabian and Antonio in Sacramento as part of the "boys club".
He's a crappy candidate and for once the Republican party got themselves a better candidate. And yes, I'm a Democrat.
THANK YOU, YOU TUBE!!!!!!!
DE LEON IS A TRAITOR!!!!!!!
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home