Your donation will help us produce journalism like this. Please give today.

Sharp and independent, Brentwood native Nick Melvoin has served on the LAUSD school board since 2017. 

But the attorney and former teacher said he’s never seen anything like this year, where he’s currently helping to guide the nation’s second-largest school system through some rough situations. 

That includes federal agents turning up at schools, looking for immigrant students; cratering enrollments; and spiraling mental health problems, fueled by a widespread cell phone addiction among students the district is now finally trying to address in an effort led by Melvoin.

It’s a lot on the plate of the second-term school board member, who represents a large, diverse district in West L.A. and the West San Fernando Valley, which stretches from Encino to Hollywood and from the Pacific Palisades to Venice. 

And, almost unbelievably, it’s all happening amid an environmental calamity that experts say could turn out to be the country’s costliest disaster of all time. L.A.’s devastating wildfires of unprecedented strength this year struck Melvoin’s board district directly, and consumed entire neighborhoods whole, homes, schools and all. 

The Palisades fire burned for two dozen days in January, killing 12 and destroying nearly 7000 buildings. Part of a complex of fires that struck the city this winter, the blaze displaced hundreds of families from Melvoin’s schools.    

That’s where we start our talk with him. 

This conversation has been edited for length and clarity. 

How is the recovery going for the neighborhoods destroyed in the Palisades Fire?

We’re just taking it one step at a time. I was proud of the work we did to relocate to our elementary schools, in their entirety, within eight days. The Army Corps disaster team told me they rarely see anything like that. So that was a nice validation of the work we did.

As we think about the permanent rebuild, you know, I’m cognizant that I’m also not just building for the next five years, but the next fifty. Hopefully this was a once-in-a-century sort of disaster.

What we’re thinking through what is, what do communities need, and how does the school district serve those communities? It’s a lot, but I’m inspired by the resilience.

There’s a lot of change happening right now at the federal level, under the new Trump administration. What are the ramifications for LA Unified?

Having served on the school board during the first Trump administration, you don’t want to swing at every pitch. We’re fully committed to protecting our vulnerable students. But we’re also not out there putting a target on their back by talking about it.

What’s really important to me is the congressional appropriation in Title One. There’s over a billion dollars for us to protect there, in that federal funding.

It boils down to protecting the federal money for local programs.

One hundred percent. So that’s why we try to take a fine line.

Still, high-profile LAUSD programs like the Black Student Achievement Plan, for example, would seem to catch the eye of the Trump administration’s anti-DEI wing.

One of the ironies, which you’re probably aware of, is that the Biden administration actually came after us because of the Black Student Achievement Plan. I’m just trying to call it like I see it. Because we’re in the business of running a school district, and not trying to play politics.

But you can’t avoid the big, sweeping changes in history, like the larger demographic shifts that are driving local enrollment declines for LAUSD.  

Part of the solution for enrollment is to see what’s working. Let’s create options that parents want.

But part of it is also acknowledging that the cost of living has skyrocketed. Folks are having fewer kids. We just don’t have the enrollment we used to, and we’re not going to.

So how do we think of our property? Are we going to build housing? Are we going to try to mitigate some of the charter co-locations?

You pushed hard for the district’s new smartphone ban. Congratulations on getting it done.

I had a meeting of my Youth Advisory Council, which is composed of students from each of my high schools. And they shared some really positive feedback. They like not being on phones.

I would say it’s been successful, as far as we continue to monitor the data. But this is a cultural shift. It wasn’t going to happen overnight.

Teachers liked the idea, but some students and parents were worried about losing touch. Now that the policy is in place, how’s it working out?  

Schools have, like, 95% general compliance. And then, if there’s an issue, they just enforce the consequences. If a student violates the rules, their phone is getting confiscated.

The first time a parent or guardian has to come into the school and pick up that student’s phone, that’s usually the end of it. Because those parents are not willing to do that again.

But is the absence of phones actually helpful for school climate?

I have more evidence of this at schools that were early adopters of cell phone policies. Those schools report that visits to psychiatric social workers are down, and visits to counselors are down. Anxiety is down. Kids report they’re happier.

Sounds like you’re off to a good start then.

I’m always of two minds. On the one hand, I think it’s a great time when we’re trending in the right direction, when we’re outperforming the state, or when we’re outperforming our peer districts. But I also won’t be satisfied until, objectively, we’re doing much better.