At Tuesday night’s School Board meeting, the Teachers Union aimed its rhetoric at two objectives, both portrayed as cost-saving measures:
• Convince the Board to downgrade the positions of two Assistant Superintendents to Director, at a “savings” of $20,000 per person.
• Convince the Board to eliminate the $250 monthly mileage allowance for each Assistant Super, at a “savings” of $3,000 per person.
Both passed overwhelmingly, as the Teachers Union probably suspected from the beginning.
Two days after the meeting, Board member Scott Zeidman still was nettled by the long and enduring spotlight that opponents trained on the mileage allowance for the two administrators, Ali Delawalla and Gwenis Laura.
“I don’t know why the Union made such a big deal over the mileage allowance,” Mr. Zeidman said, “especially since we are saving the District money by giving the allowance.
“Let’s look at it this way. Every school district, or at least the vast majority, allows assistant superintendents, or directors, car allowances. By law, we have to offer mileage reimbursement.
“To drop it would not be a $3,000 (per person) savings. It is being spun as a $3,000 savings becausethey only have a two-square mile city.
“That is not right for a simple reason — administrators drive all over Los Angeles, not just around Culver City.
“Gwenis, as the Assistant Superintendent for Educational Services, is a good example. She drives all over, to the Music Center, to Kodak, to the County Board of Education, and to other different meetings.
“She is putting in hundreds of miles a month.”
Mr. Zeidman vigorously maintained that by authorizing a set fee of $250, the School District is performing cost-effectively because 500 miles, which the allowance covers, is close to the distance she logs each month.
Finally, Mr. Zeidman asked:
“Where is the savings?
“If the District were to reimburse Gwenis at the state minimum of 50 cents per mile, when her average already is right around 500 miles, the necessity of computing, processing and reviewing each month’s figures would only compound the workload. In the end, it might cost the District more than $250.”
