L.A. Unified School District 3 election: Schmerelson vs. Chang voter guide

The election for a west San Fernando Valley seat on the Los Angeles Unified School District Board of Education pits two-term incumbent Scott Schmerelson, a retired principal, against middle school math teacher Dan Chang, who has served behind the scenes in political and education leadership roles.

The seven-member school board sets policy for the nation’s second-largest school district, which educates about 420,000 students and employs some 74,000 teachers, administrators and other staff. The school board is accountable for the district’s $18.4-billion budget. Members also hire and evaluate the superintendent.

Where is the district?

District 3 takes in much of the San Fernando Valley, moving west from North Hollywood to Sherman Oaks and Van Nuys and most Valley areas west of the 405 Freeway.

What is the big picture?

The campaign spending in District 3 is partly a throwback to the last 20 years or so in which the same two big-spending camps opposed each other time after time: the teachers union and supporters of charter schools.

An independent campaign in support of Schmerelson — funded by United Teachers Los Angeles — spent $785,000 in the primary. In the general election cycle the teachers union has spent more than $355,000 through Oct. 2.

A larger amount of money is flowing into an independent campaign on behalf of Chang — $870,000 in the primary followed by more than $2.48 million through in the general election.

While the two candidates benefited from a similar level of outside spending in the primary, for the general election, so far, Chang’s advantage is 7 to 1.

Chang’s major funder is Bill Bloomfield, a retired L.A. businessman who has moved out of state. He does not consider himself a die-hard charter school supporter, but he is aligned in this election with the political arm of the California Charter Schools Assn.

Bloomfield has become, in recent elections, the major nonunion funding source standing in opposition to the teachers union.

Schmerelson has not been aggressively anti-charter, but has been part of a board majority that has placed new limits on when charters can have access to space on a district-owned campus.

The distinctions between Schmerelson and Chang have been enough to trigger a charter-versus-union proxy war of sorts, with both sides concluding that the direction of the district related to charters is at stake.

Chang has tried to link Schmerelson to issues that he has alleged amount to wrongdoing.

One episode involved Chang’s allegation that in 2023, at Madison Middle School, where he is a math teacher, eighth-graders did not come to school on the last day of the school year in June, but were falsely recorded as present in class.

Chang raised his concerns, he said, with his principal and other district officials. He also said he refused to record his absent eighth-graders as present and later discovered that someone had altered his class attendance records — to mark all students as present on that day — without his permission.

Attendance is a major factor in the level of funding that schools receive.

The district eventually said Chang was right and the inaccurate attendance data amounted to $600 in extra state funds the district should not have received. Estimates from others were much higher, according to an April story published by KCBS.

Chang alleges that colleagues have told him that such practices have occurred at other schools as well. District officials said only Madison was affected.

Madison Middle School, located in Valley Glen, is not within Schmerelson’s district. However, Chang said Schmerelson bore responsibility because “Schmerelson neglects the basic duties of oversight as an elected school board member.”

In an interview, Schmerelson responded that keeping accurate attendance is legally and ethically mandatory and also vital for tracking the safety and learning of students. He said the district took disciplinary action — the details are confidential — in response to what Chang reported at Madison.

More recently, environmental activists have alleged that the school district is slipping in its commitment to avoid the use of potentially dangerous pesticides on campus, for such purposes as landscaping. Chang holds Schmerelson responsible on this matter as well.

In an interview, Schmerelson said the truth is essentially the opposite, that he volunteered to lead a committee to make sure that the district is limiting and safely managing the use of pesticides.

In a brief response, a district spokesperson said in a statement that L.A. Unified “has a longstanding process regarding the handling of harmful chemicals. These procedures are continuously assessed to maintain the safest protocol.”

Other issues to arise in this contest have included the role of school police on campus and allegations that the district misspent voter-approved funding to increase arts instruction, questions that the candidates have addressed below.

The responses to specific issues were compiled through a questionnaire sent to candidates by The Times, follow-up emails and conversations with the candidates. The content was supplemented with material from campaign websites and from statements at public campaign forums. Candidates also had the opportunity to provide updated input after the primary.

The answers are summarized or lightly edited for length or clarity.

Who are the candidates?

Dan Chang

Age: 48

Occupation: Middle school math teacher

Political party: Democratic Party

Experience: A math teacher since 2018. Previously worked in several political, fundraising and administrative roles, including founding Great Public Schools Los Angeles Political Action Committee, which was active in school board campaigns. Prior to that, headed Los Angeles Fund for Public Education, which raised money for L.A. Unified projects. Has held an executive role with a nonprofit that manages local public schools and with the Green Dot charter school group. Father of three children, ages 11, 13 and 17, one of whom attends an LAUSD school.

Quote: “It has been said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. It’s time for new leadership and fresh ideas at LAUSD.”

Website: www.chang4change.org

Scott Schmerelson

Age: 73

Occupation: School board member since 2015

Political party: Democratic Party

Experience: A Spanish teacher, counselor and administrator in L.A. Unified from 1978 to 2014, especially well known as a principal. Also a teacher and counselor in Philadelphia public schools, 1973 to 1978.

Quote: “Every school community is unique. Teachers, school staff and parents must be given the opportunity to participate in decisions concerning issues such as school budgeting, school safety and facility improvement priorities.”

Website: www.scottforlausd.org

What are your priorities?

Chang: Raise academic performance by scaling successful programs within LAUSD, restore Proposition 28 arts funding for elementary schools, and prioritize student safety and well-being by restoring school police. Reduce bureaucracy: “If you examine the LAUSD budget, central office and program support costs run at 6.2% of instructional spending — 5% is the benchmark that I’d like to see, which would result in about $121 million of annual funding that can be redistributed back to schools. I believe this is just the starting point.”

Schmerelson: “Ensuring student safety is my top priority. Without a sense of security, children can’t reach their full potential. Students need to feel safe and be safe at home, on the way to school and at school. Valley schools must receive equitable facility funds for clean, modern campuses with up-to-date technology, air conditioning and air filtration. I advocate for fair salaries and respect for teachers, school staff and district support staff — prioritizing their well-being and appreciation.”

What is your evaluation of Supt. Alberto Carvalho?

Chang: “Mixed. Unfortunately, the superintendent has misled the public on several important issues. He mischaracterized the district’s handling of Proposition 28 arts funding. He is dramatically overstating the district’s need for a school facilities bond. As a classroom teacher, I’ve seen positive changes around testing. Supt. Carvalho has rationalized the disparate student assessment systems plus requirements, creating a streamlined system that is much more efficient.”

Schmerelson: “The process that Supt. Carvalho used to bring the facilities bond to the board was too hurried. I would have appreciated more time, but with the looming deadline, we had to make the best decision because students deserve safe and modern schools. I’m still uncertain about the district’s compliance with Proposition 28 additional arts funding. Supt. Carvalho needs to come forward with a clear explanation and evidence that we are properly distributing the additional funds.”

For Chang: What is your evaluation of Schmerelson?

Chang: He “cannot articulate a clear vision for changing the trajectory of LAUSD and neglected the basic duties of oversight as an elected school board member, leading to ... misuse of Proposition 28 arts funds” and other ongoing problems.

For Schmerelson: What are your accomplishments?

Schmerelson: “During my tenure on the board, every school in District 3 has received funding for repairs and nearly $1 billion for facility improvements. Six schools have undergone comprehensive modernizations, and five schools have received improvements to their athletic facilities. ... We have also given unprecedented raises to our teachers, counselors and classified staff. I remain proud to have coordinated with local and state officials to put meaningful gun-safe storage” policies in place that save lives.

What is your position on charter schools?

Chang: “I am a proud supporter of L.A.’s public charter schools,” which “offer outstanding academic programs and personalized student support.” Charters “deserve their fair share of public resources and support” and “are pioneering innovative educational practices. They are highly accountable, well-regulated and an integral part of L.A.’s public school system.”

Schmerelson: “I do not believe the district’s tightened policies on sharing campuses with charter schools will be too restrictive for charters. I have long been a proponent of high-quality charter programs, but the board’s job is not to favor these privately managed programs over our district school programs.”

What is your position on school police and how would you keep schools safe? Would you restore officers to campuses or eliminate police?

Chang: “In the first month of school, we’ve already seen several instances of violent crimes being committed on district campuses. I will restore the school police budget.” He added that he would maintain the district’s commitment to “restorative practices,” which promote safety through counseling that works with students to take responsibility for their actions.

Chang’s views have evolved. In the lead-up to the primary, he’d said there was no need for restoring the police budget, emphasizing counseling instead.

Schmerelson: As a board member, Schmerelson has consistently supported funding school police and either restoring officers to secondary campuses or giving schools the option to have them.

“School police are trained to work with young people. We cannot leave their care” to the L.A. Police Department and the county Sheriff’s Department. “Our school police are effective and our resources should go to training our school police to work with social workers and counselors. Principals and school site councils need to be given far more control over whether to have an officer on campus.”

What is your position on the $9-billion bond measure the school board placed on the ballot?

Chang: He notes that L.A. Unified has billions of dollars in unissued bonds from past measures as well as eligibility for state funding should a statewide school bond pass in November. Given the steep enrollment decline, the district needs to reevaluate its plans to upgrade all campuses, he said. “This tax increase will waste money on new school buildings that will stand virtually empty. I am voting ‘no’ on LAUSD’s school bond.”

Schmerelson: “I support the school construction bond going to the voters. I believe our community supports having all of our schools clean, safe and modernized to prepare our students for their futures. All of the past construction bond funding has been committed, but that leaves the job unfinished. Our children need all the adults to step up.”

How well has the school district managed Proposition 28 funds for increased arts education? What is your response to allegations that the district has misused these funds for other purposes?

Chang: “Last year, LAUSD siphoned off Proposition 28 arts funding from its elementary schools. This left nearly every single elementary school student in LAUSD without the additional arts instruction” mandated by state law. “LAUSD misled the public for months on this issue. The only solution is for LAUSD to return $30 million in arts funding to its elementary schools for the previous school year.”

Schmerelson: He voted against certifying to the state that the district had managed its arts funds according to the rules: “There were too many unanswered questions about the fair distribution of the funds, and I will not be satisfied until the answers are clear. I have asked the superintendent and district staff to perform an audit so everyone can be satisfied that the funds have been allocated appropriately and within the spirit of the law.”