Schools in California weathered some tough budgets from 2001-03. Then the cash started rolling in. Now an avalanche is coming.
Elizabeth Hill, the state's respected, neutral legislative analyst, recently issued a five-year budget forecast. The news for schools was staggering: Taxpayers are about to hand an extra $6 billion to educators.
Put another way, schools will be able to pay for all ordinary growth in costs (salaries, utilities, debt repayment and such). Then, because flat or modestly declining enrollment will combine with the Proposition 98 autopilot spending formulas, lawmakers will have $6 billion left over that they must spend on schools.
In the most diplomatic way possible, Hill gently suggested that the next several months represent an “opportune time to plan for education reform.”
No kidding. If Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger doesn't summon up some superhero-style gumption, all that cash is sure to disappear down the same rat hole that's been devouring our tax dollars for decades.
Nationwide, inflation-adjusted spending on public schools has doubled since 1970. Yet quality has generally declined. A reasonable conclusion is that spending more on education actually hurts student performance. A better answer is that the money simply has been mismanaged.
Most went to teachers. Even after adjusting for California's high cost of living, our teachers have become the nation's highest paid. Cash also disappeared into an ever-shifting morass of special programs, mandated by the Legislature, that bloat district administrations.
Californians have wisely begun to demand accountability. The system needs work, but relying on test scores to measure the performance of educators offers the best hope of preparing our children for an ever-competitive world. You can't fix something until you measure the problem.
Meanwhile, lawmakers have resumed throwing tax dollars at education. Spending was flat for three years, but it has surged since: Schools received an average $9,977 per pupil in 2004; this year they get $11,268. Budgets will jump 30 percent by 2010 – more money chasing fewer students.
Some administrators complain that declining enrollment will erase the gains, because schools are paid by the student. San Diego Unified, for example, has lost 20,000 students since 1999.
This ought to be good news. Fewer students mean fewer teachers, buses and portable buildings. Well-managed districts will scale back operations accordingly and use the extra cash to improve education.
The great danger is that teachers unions – which have come to dominate school boards using political contributions and campaign workers – will walk off with the entire windfall.
Voters must instead demand results. Every dollar must be restricted, probably in the form of block grants tied to fundamental reforms.
Parents should get vouchers to spend at private or public schools, thus ensuring healthy competition that would slash wasteful administration. Good teachers should get bonus pay, mediocre teachers should be reassigned, and bad teachers should find new careers. Districts must stop covering up horrendous drop-out rates.
Voters have decided to invest in their children. Sacramento must not fail them.
