The state of education in California is in disarray. Individual school districts don’t have the necessary funding to pay for the curriculum. Class sizes are growing. Students are frequently unprepared for college. And everyone is exhausted.

HOW DID WE GET HERE?

For a quick look at the legislative chronology that has brought California to the brink of implosion, one need only look at the timeline.

There is a pending lawsuit, Robles-Wong vs. State of California, asking the State of California to fulfill its constitutional obligation to support public schools.  The lawsuit was filed on behalf of the California State PTA, the California School Boards Association and the Association of California School Administrators. Plaintiffs include nine school districts, as well as individual students and their families. Plaintiff Maya Robles-Wong is a 16-year-old 11th-grader at Alameda High School.

WHAT DOES THIS MEAN TO MY DISTRICT?

The disparity of money received from the state and money spent per ADA (average daily attendance) is disheartening. When just looking at the four main counties in the Bay Area, the inconsistencies are mind boggling.

There are large differences in the various districts’ make-up. While there is no “one size fits all” solution, we should look at the general structure due to administrative costs and possible overlap of services. Fremont Unified has 32,000 students overseen by one superintendent, 3 assistant superintendents, and 5 school board members. There are districts out there with only one or two schools. We should also look at the actual dollars received from the state for the general fund per ADA. All told in Alameda County there are 18 separate districts and most are unified (meaning more than just elementary or high school) serving a total student population of 214,626. Contra Costa also has 18 districts but 9 are elementary districts and the student population is much smaller at 166,956. Santa Clara County boasts 32 distinct districts with 13 listed as elementary and a total population of 261,945 students. Santa Clara County also has the highest state payouts per ADA across the Bay Area.

An egregious example of the distribution of money is the Montebello Elementary district with 21 students in Cupertino. It received $33,429 per ADA from the state and only closed last year. Why? Or what of Mountain View-Los Altos Union High district? It sits in the heart of Silicon Valley where it is home to Google, Sun Microsystems, NASA-Ames. It is self-proclaimed 55% Caucasian and approximately half of its teachers have post-graduate degrees. Not your stereotypical picture of a district in extra need of assistance. Yet the district receives $11,575 per ADA from the state. By comparison, Fremont Unified School District receives only $5,719 per ADA.

Basically, this shows the system is broken. And it is up to us to change it. It will be an uphill battle. Even most school district administrations can’t explain to you the formula used for the ADA revenue figures. It has become so ingrained into the system that most people just shake their head and then move on. This broken method of deciding funding levels accounts for approximately 61% of the revenue received for our schools.

WHERE ELSE DO SCHOOLS GET FUNDING?

Funding also comes from the federal government in several ways. Federal funds generally account for 11% of a district’s revenue. Nationally, California ranks number 16 with $1,047 per ADA revenue from the federal government for the year 2006-2007, the most recent statistics available from the U.S. Department of Education.  A full analysis is available at http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d09/tables/dt09_173.asp .

The bulk of federal money received are Title I funds for schools with a higher percentage of impoverished children. These are determined on a school by school basis. These are divided into four grant categories: basic, concentration, targeted, and education finance incentive (EFIG) grants. These are fed to the individual Local Education Agencies (LEAs) or districts through the State Education Agencies (SEAs). What can take away from these funds are private schools. Local education agencies must provide Title I “services” using these funds even to private school students in their district. These private school students don’t count in calculating the average daily attendance when determining how much money is received from the state for the general fund.

There is of course funds received from the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) and this includes some Title I funds. However the money provided for this Act is woefully inadequate and seems to be working to ensure failure on a large scale versus helping.

Locally we have property taxes and parcel taxes of varying degrees. The smallest amount of funds comes from the Lottery, roughly 1.5% or about $125 per student.

Last year, most districts received federal money in the form of American Recovery and Reinvestment of 2009 (ARRA) funds. These had some restrictions on them as to what they could be used for but came in quite handy for many struggling districts.

Some money has also come from fundraising at a local level. Fundraising is an inspiring method that helps to bring the situation into the light for the community. However, this type of activity is not sustainable long-term and generally doesn’t raise enough money to make much of a dent.

The bottom line is that more funding needs to be obtained and distributed in California. The current expenditures for public K-12 schools per student in 2007-2008 (most recent available statistics) shows California at number 41 per the National Education Association at $8,586 per student as compared to such states as Rhode Island ($15,914) and New York ($15,286) – well below the national average which is $9,934. Imagine what could be done with an additional $1,348 per student per year. That amounts to $284,306,680 a year for Alameda County alone. (Report from NEA http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/010rankings.pdf )

HOW CAN I HELP?

First and foremost, parents and community members need to get involved. Everyone needs to place a priority on education. Whether a person has school-age children or not, it should not matter. An educated populace is a better populace. The children we are educating today will be making the decisions for all of us tomorrow.

At the federal level we need to fight to rid ourselves of No Child Left Behind. The No Child Left Behind Act ensured we were not only going to leave some children behind, we were going to ensure they were properly educated in the doctrine of non-free thinking.  Let’s grill them, pigeon hole them, test them out the wazoo and make sure they have not only the inability to think for themselves but the apathy to stay out of the democratic system. We need more federal funding. Period. Only about 8.7% of the federal budget goes towards education.  For 2007, this translated to approximately $89.9 billion in education/training and $548.8 billion in defense spending.  What needs defending is our future which can only be achieved with future educated generations.

At the state level, the impact that can be made is even more pertinent to the direct outcome of our children’s education. The community needs to unite and give a loud and focused voice to our opposition of the current funding structure. Hard choices need to be made.

“Too many of the fundamental fiscal problems California faces stem from the tax inequities inherent in Proposition 13. Prop. 13 creates vast property tax loopholes for California’s largest corporate property owners, shifting the tax burden to the backs of individual homeowners and dramatically reducing California’s overall revenue for our most vital services.”  From www.closetheloophole.com .

Since its inception Proposition 13 has been a drain on the California education system. “During the decade prior to the passage of Proposition 13,California’s per pupil spending was close to or modestly higher than that for the US as a whole. After 1979-80, however, California’s per pupil spending fell below that for the nation as a whole and has remained below the US level since then.” From http://www.cbp.org/pdfs/2006/0604_prop98.pdf . 

Attention needs to be paid to who is up for election for Superintendent of Public Instruction this fall. This year’s primary was barely a blip on the media radar; yet this is the person heading up California’s education system. The more people talk about this, the more the media will cover it … and the more people will talk about it. A self-fulfilling prophesy to be sure but that is how change starts. The community also needs to hold the candidates for governor to task to present us an actual and attainable plan for our education system going forward. It is not enough to say the system is broken. We know it is broken. The leader of the most populace state in America needs to have a plan … with details. And he or she needs to share that plan (again with details) to the public before we give our vote.

Locally, we need to know what is going on within our own districts and our own schools. City councils need to take an interest in the local school district and put it as one of the priorities. Too often a builder will come in to a community with grandiose ideas of developing a new neighborhood and yet never consider where the children will go to school. It is up to the City Council to ensure funds are allocated from the builder to build a new school if necessary. It is up to the community to hold the City Council accountable. The better the education, the higher the property value. And therefore the higher the return on taxes and future growth. Within the school district, attention needs to be paid to what the school board is doing and how it is spending our funds. Programs that may sound wonderful (and usually are) just cannot be afforded during economic down times. Every penny needs to be accounted for and used wisely. School Board trustees need to be known on a personal level. There is nothing more personal than one’s own children. We need to know those making decisions on their behalf and know them well. They cannot successfully make decisions on our behalf in a vacuum.  Most are hard-working, dedicated advocates for our children. By working with your local board, they can be empowered to make the right decisions. Those making the wrong decisions can be put on notice – we are watching and if one can’t or won’t do the job then get out of the way.

At the individual school level, parents need to know who is in the principal’s office and what that person is doing. What funds are coming into the school directly and how are they being used? If your school has a school site council for each location like Fremont Unified does – then these need to be looked at to ensure they are functioning properly. Are they making the right decisions on how to spend your money? Are they even being allowed to make the decisions at all or has the system been usurped? If your district has no such councils then you need to find out who controls these funds.

It can seem overwhelming and daunting when looked at as a whole. Therefore the most important thing to do is to start the dialogue. Talk to your neighbors, your teachers, your elected officials. Unite through groups like Educacy (www.educacy.org ). Put party politics aside and just start talking. It took time to get us into this mess and it will take time to get us out of it. It will take hard work, compromise, and daring determination. But one person at a time, one vote at a time, one step at a time – WE CAN FIX THIS! We can do the right thing not just for our children but for generations to come.