Jerry Brown's New Local Control Funding Formula is to California Public Education what Obamacare is to National Public Health. Good or bad, only time well tell as the sweeping overhaul of how California funds its public schools unravels over the next three years.
The new law is designed to address funding inequities across school districts, and give districts more flexibility in spending decisions. The law replaces the old Revenue Limit Funding model and eliminates most state categorical programs. Instead, districts will receive a base funding grant in the amount of $6,500 per student, which is equal for all school districts. Additional funding, referred to as "Supplemental Grant Funds" and "Concentration Grant Funds" are available to districts based upon the percentage of their student body that are English Language Learners, and/or qualify for the Federal Free and Reduced Lunch Program, and/or are foster youth.
So what does that mean for CUSD?
CUSD will receive the $6,500 per student base grant, plus $1,771 per student supplemental grant for a total of $8,271 per student. CUSD is not eligible for the concentration grants. Compare that to Districts like LAUSD which will receive as much as $11,300 per student. (see October 23, 2013 Board Meeting Agenda Item #2 "Local Control Funding Overview" page 8- link at the end of the article)
While the new formula does provide CUSD with more funding then before, it does very little to address funding inequities across districts because the formula is designed to distribute tax dollars based on student demographics. Basing funding on student demographics favor districts like LAUSD, while doing little to improve funding for Districts like CUSD.
I would go so far as to argue that the new law is unconstitutional. Article IX of the California Constitution requires the State of California to provide a "FREE" and "EQUAL" education for all children irrespective of their families ability to pay. Why does LAUSD have enough funding to provide 180 days of school to its students, adequately pay its staff, and $1 billion in our tax money to buy every student an I-Pad, when our students are being furloughed to pay employee compensation?
As parents in the Capistrano Unified School District, we are paying three times for services. First in taxes, second in fees, and third in fundraising.
Fundraising is taking over our schools. Most parents and the public are probably not aware of the fact that we now have PTA's, PTSA's, Foundations, Booster Clubs, and even private companies fundraising to pay for things that the District is legally obligated to pay for out of its budget. The following are some donations that caught my eye at last nights Board Meeting (See October 23, 2013 Board Meeting Agenda Item #10 "Donations of Funds and Equipment", page 251 and 252- link at the end of the article)
- Wagon Wheel PTA- Classified Salary: $5,053.43 and $15,780.74
- Tieras Creek Bosster Club- Classified Salary: $6,000
- RMIQ Foundation- Classified Salary: $20,000
- Pacific Life - Classified Salary: $10,000
- Aliso Niguel High School- Professional Consulting Services: $8,747.80
- Forster Ranch Education Foundation- Professional Consulting Services: $5,000
- Ambuehl Elementary School PTA- Primary Music Teacher Salary: $10,500
- Bergeson Elementary School Foundation- Primary Music Program: $31,500
- Canyon Vista Elementary School Foundation- Instructional Aids: $23,828
- Canyon Vista Elementary School PTA- Primary Music Program: $21,000
- Capistrano Valley High School Foundation- School Loop: $6,110.72
- Concordia Elementary Education Foundation- Instructional Assistant- Science: $12,000
- Concordia Elementary School PTA- Kindergarten Support: $1,000
- Dana Hills High School PTSA- School Loop: $6,844.80
- Don Juan Avila Elementary School PTA- Primary Music Teacher Salary: $21,000
- George White Elementary School Booster Club- ETAP Tech Site Coordinator: $1,000
- John Malcolm Elementary School PTA- ST Math Student Renewal Liscense
- John Malcolm Elementary School PTA- Kindergarten Music Program - $10,500
- Moulton Elementary School PTA - Art Masters- 1st installment: $1,358.00
- Newhart Middle School- School Loop: $3,273.60
- Vista Del Mar PTA- Meet the Masters Deposit: $1,000
- Vista Del Mar PTA- 5th Grade Outdoor Science Camp Deposit: $1,000
- Vista Del Mar PTA- School Loop Renewal: $1,418.56
What quality of education can students in the poorest schools in our District expect to receive if they are unable to fundraise? Does that mean schools with lower income students will have larger class sizes, no art, no music, no library, no school nurse, no paper?
As parents and taxpayers we have lost our way if we really hope to provide our students with an adequate education by relying on handouts and the generosity of local businesses to pay for what the State of California is legally mandated to pay for. The road to ruin is paved with the best intentions.
I think it is also important to remind the PTA that it is chartered as an "advocacy" organization. When the PTA spends the majority of its time "fundraising", rather than "advocating", it risks loosing its not-for-profit-status. We need the PTA to be a voice for our children, not the fundraising arm of the CTA, which it has become.
Implementation of the "new" Local Control Funding Formula Law-
Local Control gives each district control of how funds are to be spent in their district. Without oversight or accountability, the door is wide open for abuse.
Under the law, each school district is suppose to produce a "Local Control Accountability Plan" that will set annual goals and describe how the district will use available resources to better craft solutions to address local needs. To provide for greater transparency, the law requires districts to involve principals, teachers, parents, students, and other community members in the planning process. The plans are suppose to include actions that the District plans to take to provide basic conditions necessary for student achievement such as providing for:
- credentialed teachers,
- adequate instructional materials,
- facilities in good repair,
- implementation of the common core standards,
- improve academic outcomes,
- address the needs of English learners, foster children, and students from low-income backgrounds.
At last nights Board meeting, CUSD presented a preliminary Local Control Accountability Plan. The plan has four phases. The plan does not include general members of the public until Phase 3. In Phase 3, Public input is limited to written questions. The Superintendent is expected to respond individually in writing to each written question. How can there be transparency when members of the public will only see the response to their individual written question, and are not able to participate in a verbal exchange of ideas. This is an intentional lack of transparency, with the intent to exclude parents and the public from the process. CUSD's initial plan does not comply with the spirit of the law. (See Exhibit 3: LCFF and LCAP PowerPoint- 8th slide)
"Parent Involvement" and "Student Engagement" are among the priorities spelled out in the law.
CUSD- Poster Child for Lack of Transparency and Abuse of Taxpayer Funds
Capistrano Unified School District demonstrated why every Parent and Taxpayer need a "Local Control Accountability Plan"... a plan that ensures transparency and accountability of how funds are to be spent. Without mandates on how to spend funds, the fear is that Districts will use the funds for increased spending on employee compensation, rather than on the basic conditions outlined above.
There is currently no Local Control Accountability Plan in place - Districts were told not to include "NEW" LCFF money in the 2013- 2014 budget. However- this summer, CUSD and the Teachers Union negotiated behind closed doors, and agreed to waive Article 12 of the Districts contract with the Teachers Union. Article 12 is a provision that requires the District and CUEA to negotiate in good faith, to complete contracts before adopting the Districts final 2013- 2014 budget. (The two parties basically waived compliance with State Law.) Do they have the power to decide not to comply with State Law? No. Even if they thought they did, shouldn't the matter have been made public and brought to the Board for approval? Of Course!
see http://www.cuea.org/information_v2/ContractToJun2013.pdf page 47 - 48
Why did CUSD do this?
The reason: CUSD delayed the execution of employment contracts so that NEW “Local Control Funding Formula” revenue could be used in conjunction with a 1.56% COLA to trigger the restoration language contained in Article 14 of 2012- 2013 employment contract between CUEA and CUSD relating to the 2010 Teachers Union Strike. Which is exactly what CUSD did.
see http://www.cuea.org/information_v2/ContractToJun2013.pdf page 54 - 55
Out of the $8.24 million in "NEW" LCFF revenues, CUSD chose to restore $5.622 million in salaries before beginning to make the decision on how to cut $16.8 million from CUSD's budget for the current year 2013-2014. Despite the passage of Prop 30 and despite $8.24 million in new revenue, CUSD still had to identify $16.8 million in budget cuts for the current school year. (see Memo from Clark Hampton to Trustees dated June 30, 2013: http://capousd.ca.schoolloop.com/file/1218998864154/5983148645706375659.pdf )
The result of this years employment contracts? Substantial increases to employee compensation while our students have 3 furlough days, additional cuts to programs, largest class sizes in the State and buildings that are falling down around them.
Just the Facts:
Average cost of of a CUSD Teacher (CUEA): Increase of $9,667.00
2012-2013 $ 95,673 (Number of Employees 2,035)
2013-2014 $105,340 (Number of Employees 2,035)
Average cost of of a CUSD Classified Worker (CSEA): $7,479.00
2012-2013 $45,491 (Number of Employees 1,298)
2013-2014 $52,970 (Number of Employees 1,298)
Despite the new funding formula CUSD is projecting a $15 million dollar shortfall for 204-2015. See Patch Article: "Capo Schools Facing $15 Mil Shortfall for Next Year... http://sanjuancapistrano.patch.com/groups/schools/p/capo-schools-facing-15-mil-shortfall-for-next-ye...
and
Because of years of deferred maintenance our schools need one Billion with a "B" in repairs.
See Patch Article: Farley: Capo Schools Need $1 Billion in Repairs http://sanjuancapistrano.patch.com/groups/schools/p/farley-capo-schools-need-1-billion-in-repairs
See Patch Article: CUSD Needs $822 Mil for Repairs, Upgrades But Only Has $45 Million http://sanjuancapistrano.patch.com/groups/schools/p/capo-unified-needs-822-mil-in-repairs-upgrades-b...
Sources California Department of Education: http://www.dof.ca.gov/reports_and_periodicals/district_estimate/documents/LCFF_Policy_Brief.pdf
and
Sources Capistrano Unified School District:
October 23, 2013 Board Meeting Agenda Item #2 "Local Control Funding Overview", page 8
http://capousd.ca.schoolloop.com/file/1229223560406/1218998864154/8975491589572867515.pdf
October 23, 2013 Board Meeting Agenda Item #10 "Donations of Funds and Equipment", page 251 and 252
http://capousd.ca.schoolloop.com/file/1229223560406/1218998864154/7100833297955586121.pdf
