BILL ANALYSIS
ACR 54
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
ACR 54 (Brownley)
As Amended July 15, 2009
Majority vote
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |49-29|(May 11, 2009) |SENATE: |21-13|(August 31, |
| | | | | |2009) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: ED.
SUMMARY : Recognizes the need for the state to generate
sufficient funds for, and allocate sufficient funds to,
education. Specifically, this bill :
1)Makes findings as to the insufficient levels of funding for
education in California, including the causes and impacts
related to that level of funding.
2)Resolves that it is the intent of the Legislature to generate
sufficient funds for, and allocate sufficient funds to,
education, so as to bring per pupil spending up to or beyond
the national average and to a level that accounts for the
actual cost of educating California's diverse pupil population
so that all pupils are prepared at the end of their elementary
and secondary education experiences for college, careers, and
successful participation in our democratic institutions, no
matter where they live or what economic, racial, or ethnic
background they have.
3)Resolves that the Chief Clerk of the Assembly transmit copies
of this resolution to the Governor, to the Superintendent of
Public Instruction, to the Chairs of the Assembly Committees
on Budget and on Education, the Chairs of the Senate
Committees on Budget and Fiscal Review and on Education, to
the Secretary for Education, and to the President of the State
Board of Education.
The Senate amendments add a finding related to the provision of
the California Constitution that states that, "From all state
ACR 54
Page 2
revenues there shall first be set apart the moneys to be applied
by the State for support of the public school system and public
institutions of higher education." [California Constitution,
Section 8 (a) of Article XVI]
EXISTING LAW provides for Revenue Limit (base discretionary)
funding for school districts that is, in part, based on average
daily attendance (ADA), and categorical program funding that
focuses on specific programs, classes of students or schools, or
uses of the funds identified by the Legislature as priorities.
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill was substantially similar
to the version passed by the Senate.
FISCAL EFFECT : This bill is keyed non-fiscal.
COMMENTS : This resolution states the intent of the Legislature
to provide sufficient funding for education to bring per pupil
spending up to or beyond the national average and to a level
that accounts for the actual cost of educating California's
diverse pupil population; in short, to provide an adequate level
of school funding.
For the last four decades California school finance has been
driven by a combination of ballot initiatives and court cases
concerned with expenditure and education service equity. These
court cases were all based on the same basic premise, that the
state constitution requires parity in education spending and
education services between rich and poor school districts and
students. This sort of legal argument was not invented in
California. For example in 1819 in Commonwealth v. Dedham, 16
Mass. 141, Massachusetts courts held that schools must "be
maintained for the benefit of the whole town," and that it is
not "in the power of the majority to deprive the minority of
this privilege." California courts ruled that education is a
fundamental constitutional right in California, and that the
wealth-related differences in school support, that were inherent
in the state's early education funding mix, needed to be
eliminated. This ruling was made by the California Supreme
Court in 1971 when it remanded Serrano v. Priest, 487 P.2d 1241,
for trial, and again in 1976, in Serrano v. Priest (Serrano II
), 557 P.2d 929, when it affirmed a lower court's finding. A
state superior court more recently reaffirmed these decisions in
1999 in Williams v. State, which dealt with substandard school
facilities and services related to low levels of funding. The
ACR 54
Page 3
courts called for a more equitable system for funding public
schools, and the result has been a system in which school
revenues are controlled at the state level. Over the last two
decades litigation in the area of education finance in other
states has shifted from concern over equity alone toward the
issue of adequacy. The decisions from earlier cases, that
education is a fundamental right under state constitutions have
led many courts to rule that states are required to provide the
resources necessary for an "adequate" level of education to
prepare students for citizenship and work. Since 1989,
plaintiffs have won over two-thirds of these cases.
Education Week published rankings show that California is 47th
among the states and District of Columbia in per pupil
expenditures on K-12 education, when cost-of-living differences
across the states are taken into account. The National
Education Association ranks California 34th among the 50 states
and the District of Columbia in per pupil expenditures by public
schools in 2007-08. The U.S. Census Bureau reported in 2008,
that California was 29th among the 50 states and the District of
Columbia in per pupil expenditures by public schools in 2005-06,
with per pupil spending on education approximately 8% below the
national average.
According to the California Taxpayer's Association (Cal-Tax),
"California's most significant [budget] difference from other
states is in education spending, where the average other state
spends 24% of total state and local budgets on K-12 schooling
compared to California's 20.4%." Cal-Tax also ranks California
10th among the 10 western states in the percent of state and
local government spending directed to K-12 education.
As part of the Getting Down to Facts: School Finance and
Governance in California project, requested jointly by the
Speaker of the California Assembly, President Pro Tempore of the
California Senate, the Governor of California and the State
Superintendent of Public Instruction and released by Stanford
University's Institute for Research on Education Policy in 2007,
researchers defined adequate funding to be that level necessary
to meet the state goal of an Academic Performance Index of 800
for all schools in California, and found that over $17 billion
(in 2003-04 dollars), more than a 40% increase, in additional
state funding would be required to start California's climb
towards adequacy.
ACR 54
Page 4
Analysis Prepared by : Gerald Shelton / ED. / (916) 319-2087
FN: 0001990