The coming 30% plunge in LAUSD
No one who pays attention to public education in California would be surprised to hear that a large school system in the state was likely to see declining enrollment in coming years.
There are such obvious reasons why this should be so, with some of the wounds certainly self-inflicted, others merely a function of generational demographics.
There are thousands more private elementary and secondary schools in California than there were several decades ago. Public charter schools are now a real competition to the assigned local school. In the pandemic, Catholic parochial schools saw a large uptick in enrollment both here and throughout the country as they returned to in-person instruction more quickly than the publics.
So, a prediction of fewer students was to be expected.
But when the Los Angeles Unified School District board was given a report earlier this month predicting that within a decade its student body would plunge by an astounding 30%, it was as if a hydrogen bomb had gone off on South Beaudry Avenue.
An organization can't survive losing almost a third of its clientele and remain anything like the same outfit it was prior to the drastic drop. As the Los Angeles Times' education writer Howard Blume reported, this means “tough choices ahead about academic programs, campus closures, jobs and employee benefits — and forcing, over that time, a dramatic remake of the nation's second-largest school system.”
Compounding the coming economic blow: the teachers union says it will be seeking an astounding 20% raise for its members over just the next two years.
No wonder Supt. Alberto Carvalho said: “There are a number of unsustainable trends ... The perfect storm is brewing.”
But there is essentially nothing new here. Two decades ago, the LAUSD had 737,000 students; now it's 430,000. In nine years it will be about 309,000.
The resulting problems will be myriad. But this one is enough, Blume reports: “there could be more L.A. Unified retirees and dependents receiving healthcare benefits than active employees, said Chief Financial Officer David Hart.
`That was never contemplated,' Hart said.”
California's rental market is so very tight for tenants
Re “Tenants struggle as rents soar” (May 22):
California has a housing crisis. Tenants' rents are soaring. Prices have skyrocketed. Building costs are spiraling. Availability has collapsed. California state and local politicians control the policies that are the cause. The same political party has had that control for the past 40 years. Yet, I would bet come June 7, those struggling tenants will vote for the same political party and politicians but expect different results.
Biden bashing
Every portion of Sunday's (May 22) paper spotlights the incompetence and dastardly intentions of the Biden administration. From the front page, which shows the rising hate crimes, to the Local section, which dissects the mass shootings in our area, to the COVID mandate fallout, to Avenatti's fall, to $34 chicken wings in the Today's Economy section, to the bumbling of the baby formula supply, to the housing crunch, to the ads that proclaim profound inflation, to the Opinion section which seemingly longs for a return of President Trump and the Cartoonist's Take, which pokes fun at the idea of taking out a loan for a tank of gas. The horrific rise in drug deaths was addressed in a special section, but the blame was not properly placed on Biden's policy of an open border. I dare say that if I could peruse a late May edition of the newspaper from 2019, there would be precious few examples of President Trump's policies making the lives of Americans poorer, less safe or more miserable.
HR 7688
Re “House approves bill on gas price gouging” (May 20):
On May 8, U.S. Rep. Jay Obernolte wrote an op-ed piece for newspaper where he bemoaned the rising price of gas and he promised “to fight for policies that will lower the gas prices we are paying here in California's 8th District.”
On May 19, Obernolte had an actual opportunity to make good on that promise when the House put HR 7688 to the vote, but instead of keeping his promise, Obernolte voted against the bill and gave his permission for oil companies to raise the price of a gallon of gas however high they wish. What a hypocrite. But then again, he is consistent with the Republican ideal of giving every advantage to wealthy corporations at the expense of working-class Americans.