CALIFORNIA
FOCUS
FOR RELEASE: TUESDAY, MARCH 12, 2013, OR THEREAFTER
FOR RELEASE: TUESDAY, MARCH 12, 2013, OR THEREAFTER
BY THOMAS D. ELIAS
“BROWN UNLIKELY TO GET ALL HE WANTS FOR
ENGLISH LEARNERS”
Gov. Jerry Brown
has never described it quite this way, but the essence of what he wants to do
with many of the new tax dollars from last fall’s Proposition 30 is finish the
job begun in 1971 by the Serrano v. Priest decision of the California Supreme
Court.
“Equal treatment
for children in unequal situations is not justice,” Brown said as he proposed
giving school districts with high concentrations of English-learners,
subsidized-lunch students and foster children as much as $5,000 per year over
several years for each such student they have, in addition to the “base grant”
of $6,800 per year that schools get for every pupil.
Brown’s observation
was much like the reasoning of the Serrano decision, which ruled the former
prevailing system of school finance a violation of the equal protection clause
of the state Constitution. Because Serrano was based on the state Constitution,
not the federal one, it has never been seriously challenged in federal appeals
courts.
In short, Serrano
held that the fact wealthy school districts could spend more than poor ones on
each of their pupils was flat-out unfair. At the time the case was filed on
behalf of a student in the Baldwin Park School District in 1969, that district
spent $577 per year to educate each of them, while Pasadena spent $840 and
Beverly Hills $1,232. Those inequalities stemmed directly from differences in
property values from district to district.
A series of
Serrano-related decisions through the 1970s saw the courts demand that
disparities in official per-student spending be no more than $100 per year,
later adjusted for inflation to $350.
Of course, many
wealthy districts raise millions of dollars each year via voluntary
contributions from parents and other local citizens, something the state cannot
prevent. So districts in places like Palo Alto, Palos Verdes, Beverly Hills and
Hillsborough still get more than those in Trona, McFarland, Compton and Los
Angeles.
Now Brown wants to
take things farther. Los Angeles, with a large majority of Latino students,
would be one prime beneficiary of the governor’s proposal, getting more than a
17 percent boost next year over current funding, and that's just for the first
year of the plan.
Chances are that
other districts bearing the brunt of educating California’s large corps of
immigrant children, with whom English is often not spoken at home, will also
get some new benefits.
But just because
Brown is a Democrat and his party now holds majorities of about two-thirds in
both legislative houses does not mean he will get everything he wants.
For educators in
some of the state’s better-performing school districts are wary of too much
equalization. They know what standardized test scores show: In spite of the
fact that spending is much closer to equal today than before Serrano, the
quality of instruction and course offerings is still far from consonant. In
general, students from wealthier districts still do better on standardized
tests and in life. This is partly a function of the differing degrees of parental
wealth and interest in education from place to place.
It’s almost certain
that Republicans, who opposed the original Serrano decision even though it was
written by then-Chief Justice Donald Wright, a Ronald Reagan appointee, will
also object to Brown’s plan, which essentially aims to give children of
immigrants – legal or not – the same opportunities for success as children of
native born citizens.
At the same time,
there are plenty of suburban Democrats in both houses of the Legislature who
represent well-heeled areas where voters have passed school construction bonds
and where parents donate heavily to public schools.
One is Joan
Buchanan, chair of the Assembly Education Committee, who spent 18 years on the
San Ramon Valley School Board in the East Bay area. Facilities expanded greatly
during her time on that board, while the district moved into the top 5 percent
in California academically.
Buchanan, through
whose committee Brown’s plan must pass, has so far not said much about it.
It’s unlikely she
or other Democrats, mindful of the strong Latino vote their party usually
draws, would object to providing some more money to districts with a plethora
of English learners. But to almost double the basic grant of $6,800 per student
over the next five years? That might be another question.
The likely outcome
then, is that the final budget that reaches Brown’s desk this summer will
include a boost in funding for each English-learner, foster child and
subsidized lunch recipient. Just not as much as Brown proposed in January.
Which may be what Brown – a skilled and veteran negotiator – actually figured
on.
-30-
Email Thomas Elias at tdelias@aol.com. His book, "The
Burzynski Breakthrough, The Most Promising Cancer Treatment and the
Government’s Campaign to Squelch It," is now available in a soft cover
fourth edition. For more Elias columns, visit www.californiafocus.net
No comments:
Post a Comment