Growing efforts to reform school system
Californians have been dissatisfied with the state’s public schools for decades, but to quote a famous entertainer of the 20th century, “You ain’t seen nothin’ yet.”
Back in 1992, the Legislature responded to public dismay over the quality of K-12 education by creating public charter schools that would have more independence, often without a union contract for faculty and staff.
Ever since, the powerful teachers’ unions have sought to erode the competitive pressure from charters. They achieved a victory in 2019, when newly elected Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill 1505. The law made it harder to start new charter schools by giving local school districts more power to prevent the competition; under AB 1505, school districts could block a new charter from opening if its programs were duplicative or if the fiscal impact “would substantially undermine” the existing schools in the neighborhood.
That put the failing schools in the position to block any competition. As if that wasn’t enough, in June 2020, the Legislature passed a pandemicresponse budget that based school funding on the previous year’s attendance, penalizing schools with growing enrollments. That hurt public charter schools that had attracted new students by offering virtual learning programs during the lockdown. Even with a legislative “fix,” Senate Bill 820 in October 2020, schools with growing enrollment continued to be underfunded.
The legislative harassment of charter schools continued this year with Assembly Bill 1316, supported by the California Teachers Association, which the CTA said would improve “audit and accounting systems” and “oversight,” restructure a “flawed funding determination process” and close “loopholes” in student attendance. The bill was sent to the inactive file in June by its author, Assembly education committee Chair Patrick O’Donnell, D-Long Beach, but could return in 2022.
Under state law, school funding is supposed to follow the student, but Newsom and state lawmakers have consistently tried to limit the options available to those students.
Now a backlash is taking shape. Two ballot initiatives have been filed with the attorney general’s office that would require the state to fund education savings accounts annually for students whose parent or guardian requests it. The state would be required to calculate the per-pupil education spending for the academic year and deposit that amount in an account for the benefit of the student, with the money to be directed by the parents to the school of their choice. The state would be prohibited from raising taxes to accomplish this.
Another proposed initiative seeks to amend the California constitution to require the state to provide “high-quality” public education for all students; currently only a “free public education” is guaranteed. Like the school choice initiatives, this measure would prohibit new taxes. Proponents say the aim is to “finally empower public school parents with a seat at the table” to challenge policies that trap students in failing schools, divert funding and prevent the justified dismissal of problem teachers.
Further evidence of backlash against business as usual in Sacramento can be seen in another initiative that could affect the schools. Silicon Valley venture capitalist Tim Draper is the proponent of a measure that would end collective bargaining for government employees in California, effectively abolishing powerful public employee unions.
Parents in California may be writing a new chapter in the state’s education textbook.
Under state law, school funding is supposed to follow the student, but Newsom and state lawmakers have consistently tried to limit the options available to those students.