When the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was still an influence, the schools in California were analyzed for equalization of funding. That is to say, how can students in large public school districts in impoverished areas compete with a small district in a rich community where the property taxes benefitted wholesome, wealthy public schools?
The answer by the mid 1970’s was to equalize the funds that a school district gets. At that time, the state was not only thinking of poor black students like on the east coast, but of the rising demographic of poor Hispanic students and a multitude of other children who spoke many languages, but not standard American California English.
Sounds good but led to Proposition 13 which, in this blogger’s opinion, has done no good for schools even thirty-five years later. Much to the regular guy’s surprise, the state took over the schools. There had been plenty of warnings: while property taxes were a problem, only 35 years later are the actual details of the proposition being looked at and the rules coming to light.
Now in spite of the proposition’s faults, which will take forever to be ironed out in our legislature, the governor must, to balance the budget, either have the great state of California raise taxes or defund the schools next year (2012-2013) by 6 percent. And school districts, much less the regular guy, won’t know until votes are counted in November 2012.
Two adjustments are certain.
First, if the tax initiatives don’t pass-and there are several-and if 6 percent of funds must be cut, that will mean teachers will be gone. In anticipation, pink slips galore will appear March 15, 2012. It’s anyone’s guess if one of the many tax measures passes in November 2012, but school districts will have to rehire teachers and reallocate students to classrooms three months after the new school year has begun.
Second, transitional kindergarten, a program for all the children who are not five years old by September 1, 2012, will not begin. This model has been organized for three years to start this year after the legislature changed the school age law.
These two education changes, which do not lead to any happy outcome, are the tip of the school district’s iceberg. Let’s hope the state Department of Education can do its part to urge the legislature to balance the state budget without failing students.