Educational Affects of Proposition 13

After watching the video, First to Worst, I have a lot of emotions and feelings toward State operations and educational power. To simply answer the question, the outcomes have been extremely negative in my local district.

As an educator for 8 years and a site negotiator for CTA the last 2 ½ years, I feel like I’ve never truly been exposed to Proposition 13 and its unintended consequences. Almost like, we [my district] have accepted that we do not get additional funding and that’s the way it is; we have to hustle for cash and that’s the way it is. It makes so much more sense now, and I feel so ignorant to admit that I am so unaware of the impacts of Proposition 13. Yes, I have sat through local board meetings, I have heard murmurs around local control, I have witnessed conversations about local bills to increase property taxes for education, and I have witnessed conversations around local taxes, but it has never “clicked” until now.

Working in a Tier 1 School and struggling WITH the district leaders to find solutions for high quality teachers, equitable education and appropriate educational facilities is a huge issue district-wide. We are constantly reflecting on LCAP goals and our Strategic Plan, while reflecting on how we fund everything in our district plan. We hustle. We hustle to find program grants, teachers write grants for their classrooms, we broadcast parent club initiatives, booster programs, and so much more. We partner with local businesses for stakeholder support, we offer student programs (that we almost can’t afford) in order to keep enrollment up, we struggle with attendance and keeping kids in school for ADA funding, and we exhaust our personal calories into keeping our campus successful. At what cost?

While watching First to Worst I wrote down the following quotes to begin closing my knowledge gap, and to fuel my fire:

“...changed the system of local schools to a state system…”

“...power shifted…to fiscal power…”

“In 1994 CA backpedaled Whole Language…and continues to try new ideas…refuses to release power…”

“...turned our backs on schools…to focus on results [assessment scores]...”

In the Orinda School District (OSD), attorney Paula Goodwin explains the situation as this: the State gives a box with 35-40 students to a school, with the mandate of $6,000 per student. If districts want anything more than a box and $6,000 then the district needs to work for it. She describes parent clubs as large proprietors in generating funding for school districts. This is labeled as “semi-private-public schools” creating $2,000 more per student, specifically in OSD, in order to fill the gaps that the state cannot provide (ie. band, drama, facilities, salaries, etc.). Conversely, where do low-income communities fit into this notion of finding more money to provide to schools? They don’t fit into this solution.

A.Glatthorn, F. Boschee, B. Whitehead, B. Boschee (2019) Curriculum Leadership: Strategies for Development and Implementation. 5th Edition.P104-137. SAGE Publications, Inc.

Concordia University, Irvine. (March 15, 2023). Balancing the Swinging Pendulum of the Curriculum Module. [EDUA 517]. Online Canvas Classroom.

The Report of the Committee of TenAuthor(s): James C. MachenzieSource: The School Review, Vol. 2, No. 3 (Mar., 1894), pp. 146-155Published by: The University of Chicago PressStable

The Cardinal Principles of Secondary Education. www3.nd.edu/~rbarger/www7/cardprin.html