Skip to content

School districts consider legislative solutions for funding inequities

The Education finance Bill passed 28-5 Tuesday. Legislation will make additional education funding available

Author
UPDATED:

LAKE COUNTY— As school districts throughout Lake County prepare to close another challenging academic year, administrators and educators looked at the impact of enrollment and are considering legislative solutions to deal with funding inequities. According to officials, Konocti Unified School District (KUSD) enrollment is 3,775. “We ended last year at 3,670. We are continuing to grow. We are the largest district in the county,” said Superintendent Rebecca Salato.

Kelseyville Unified School District (KVUSD) is also experiencing increased enrollment. “We have gained 78 students from this time last year. We haven’t had this many students at this time period since 2005-2006. We are actually growing in our enrollment,” said Superintendent Dave McQueen.

McQueen said he is not sure what the state is going to do to address any low enrollment gaps. “Obviously, any help would be appreciated. Schools are currently funded by Average Daily Attendance (ADA), not enrollment. That is a percentage of your enrollment of who is attending. That is actually less money. There is currently a bill that would fund schools based on enrollment, not ADA. We’ll have to see what the details are and if it helps schools,” he added.

The legislation Superintendent Dave McQueen made reference to is Senate Bill (SB) 830, a measure that will determine supplemental funding for K-12 schools based on the daily average student enrollment numbers, passed on Tuesday by a 28-5 vote and as of press time Wednesday has been ordered to the State Assembly.

“With the state anticipating a $31 billion dollar surplus, it is critical that increasing K-12 education funding be front and center in those discussions.  We are currently using an outdated system that only considers student attendance.  Now is the perfect time to implement structural reforms that will benefit every school district in California,” stated Senator Anthony J. Portantino. “The pandemic will have long-lasting impacts on student achievement and mental health.  It is important more than ever that we ensure students are in school and are receiving the support they need to learn and thrive. SB 830 aims to achieve this goal.”

California is one of only six states that does not consider student enrollment figures for determining state aid to school districts. Districts plan their budgets and expend funds based on the number of students enrolled but receive funds based on their average daily attendance.  For example, if a school district enrolls one hundred students but their attendance rate is 95%, the school district must still prepare as if one hundred students will attend class every day but only receive funding for 95 students.

Proponents stated that SB 830 remedies this inequity and defines “average daily membership” as the amount of the aggregate enrollment days for all pupils in a school district or county office of education, from transitional kindergarten to grade 12, divided by the total number of instructional days for the local educational agency in an academic year. The bill as written requires a local educational agency to receive the difference between what they will have received under the local control funding formula (LCFF) based on average daily enrollment and what they received under the local control funding formula based on average daily attendance for that fiscal year.

In order for a local educational agency to be eligible for supplemental educational funding, SB 830 will require the local educational agency to report the average daily enrollment for the prior academic year to the State Superintendent on July 1 and to demonstrate maintenance of effort to address chronic absenteeism and habitual truancy.  SB 830 will also require local educational agencies to use at least 50% of their supplemental education funding to supplement existing local educational agency expenditures to address chronic absenteeism and habitual truancy.

“Our current attendance-based funding system takes resources away from schools in lower-income communities because they experience higher rates of absenteeism,” said California School Employees Association President Matthew “Shane” Dishman. “Our members, including instructional assistants and attendance clerks, know that student absences actually cost money and demand additional resources to track down absent students and prepare make-up assignments.  The truth is, attendance-based funding punishes students in schools that most need the state’s financial support.”

According to a summary and analysis of the Governor’s May revise budget for 2022-23 prepared by the Legislative Analyst’s Office, a nonpartisan fiscal and policy advisor, Total state spending on schools and community colleges is determined mainly by a set of constitutional formulas set forth in Proposition 98. These formulas establish a minimum funding requirement for K‑14 education, commonly known as the minimum guarantee. The state meets the guarantee through a combination of General Fund and local property tax revenue.

The Legislature, in turn, decides how to allocate this funding among specific school and community college programs. Many factors affect the costs of these programs, including changes in student attendance and statutory cost‑of‑living adjustments (COLAs). When the guarantee exceeds the cost of existing programs, the difference is available for new commitments. For simplicity, they refer to this amount as the “surplus” within the school and community college budget.

After setting aside funding for statutory COLAs and other planned program expansions, the Governor’s budget includes $33.5 billion in discretionary spending proposals to meet the minimum required funding level for schools and community colleges.

In addition to the $35 billion in state appropriations limit (SAL) exclusions that use the overall General Fund surplus, the Governor proposes using $5.1 billion from the surplus within the school and community college budget for SAL‑excluded purposes. The largest component is $3.2 billion for deferred maintenance ($1.7 billion for schools and $1.5 billion for community colleges).

Managing editor Ariel Carmona Jr. Contributed to this story.

Originally Published:

RevContent Feed

Page was generated in 2.5879311561584