Education Policy – Look Ahead: Ballot Measures and Legislation

 CAPITOL WEEKLY PODCAST: This Special Episode of the Capitol Weekly Podcast was recorded live at Capitol Weekly’s Conference on Education Policy which was held in Sacramento on Tuesday, November 7, 2023

This is Panel 3 – LOOK AHEAD: BALLOT MEASURES AND LEGISLATION

 PANELISTS: Michael Borges, California Teachers Association; Christina Laster, Bold Enterprises LLC; Scott Richards, Teach For America

 Moderated by Rich Ehisen, Capitol Weekly

This transcript has been edited for clarity.

TIM FOSTER: This is our final panel of the day. It is a Look Ahead at Ballot Measures and Legislation. So the “politics” panel, which at Capitol Weekly, we always think is the fun one. I wanted to thank our sponsors and underwriters to this event. Capitol Weekly is a 501 [c] [3] nonprofit. We could not do events or basically anything else without the support of our underwriters.

And for today’s event, we were very lucky to have the Tribal Alliance of Sovereign Indian Nations, the Western States Petroleum Association, KP Public Affairs, Perry Communications, Capitol Advocacy, Lucas Public Affairs, The Weideman Group, and the California Professional Firefighters. And we thank them very much for their support.

With that, I’m gonna turn this over to our moderator. Moderator for today’s panel is Rich Ehisen. Rich is the editor of Capitol Weekly, and prior to that he was with State Net and did a plethora of editing and reporting for them on multiple of their projects. And he’s gonna take over the duties today. Thanks so much.

RICH EHISEN: Well, thank you, Tim. And I thank all of you for being here. The last panel of the day is always the one where you expect there to be just a skeleton crew. So looking out and seeing so many faces still here, very… It warms my heart. Thank you very much for doing that. The bios for our panelists, with one exception, are in your program. So I’m just gonna go very briefly. I want to give us as much time to cover our issues as we can to my immediate left is Michael Borges of the California Teachers Association. To his immediate left isChristina Laster, Laster, from Bold Enterprises, LLC among many things you do. And then to her left is Scott Richards, the Executive Director for Teach For America’s Capital Valley outlet.

So, thank you all for being here. Appreciate it very much. And as Tim noted this panel is on Ballot Measures and Legislation, looking ahead to 2024. A little caveat right up front: A lot of this is speculative because a lot of the things we’re talking about are not yet on the ballot or not yet introduced as legislation, or might be two year bills, or as a Superintendent Thurman noted, one of them is sitting in a committee that we’re gonna talk about that proposal though, just so you know.

So, but let’s get going with Christina, I’m gonna hit you with a question right up front here ’cause this is one that I think most of us are paying a lot of close attention to, which is a proposed constitutional amendment that would establish a constitutional right to a public education. As I said, I know you’re involved with this. Give us your perspective on this particular proposal.

CHRISTINA LASTER: So, I’d like to… And I’m gonna pull the mic in a little bit ’cause I’m only 5′ 2″, and so it helps if I pull it in. I’d like to just start out with, I’m a mom and I’ve been dropping a child off at elementary school for the last three decades. I have four grandchildren. I have a 30 year old and a 12 year old. I’m in this, I’m fully vested in this.

Panel 3 – LOOK AHEAD: BALLOT MEASURES AND LEGISLATION. Rich Ehisen, Michael Borges, Christina Laster, Scott Richards. Photo by Scott Duncan, Capitol Weekly

And so I also immediately after high school went to work for one of the second largest districts, which was San Diego Unified. And that was something that I followed my children along the way and was able to be there and see different things. And so echoing what Thurgood Marshall said, which was, he didn’t believe that the constitution was something that was fixed. Right? And the three words that frame that and make it more evidentiary is “we the people,” right?

And so, looking at all of the policy and legislative changes, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and the Local Control Funding Formula, and having this discussion over three decades has done something different in my mind as a parent. And that was to look at the constitutional amendment and what does the Constitution actually say with regards to education and what the state is obligated to provide?

And what I found was is that there are compulsory education laws that compel parents like myself and grandparents, and even those that are taking care of their grandchildren to send their children to school. But then we ask, well, what is the level of quality that we’re getting back, right? And how does it make sense for us as parents to be compelled to send our children to public school, which is fine, but not be able to tangibly see an outcome that offers our children upward mobility. So I started thinking in the terms of what quality is not.

A lot of people say, well, what is quality? And I said, well, the minimum baseline standard that I would talk about as a parent and grandparent is quality is not our children graduating illiterate or enumerate. And it’s definitely not bad treatment in schools, right? And if I’m compelled to drop my child off at school, but based on these laws, I want to receive outcomes. I want to know that those are guaranteed and that I have a fundamental right to that.

And so the constitution in the state of California, Article Nine, Section Five states that we have a system of public or common schools that is guaranteed to us, and that’s it. And so I started talking to other parents about the level of quality and what is it that they would like to see? Is this like a civil rights thing or a constitutional amendment was where we landed. We wanna see that 1879 language updated, and to include a minimum baseline standard of what we’re gonna be able to receive when we follow the compulsory education laws.

And so that’s where we’re headed with this initiative. And that was my role in it. And like I said, over three decades worth of experience in education. I think it’s time.

RE: So I’m gonna… I’d like both of you also to weigh in on this because I think the question that comes with something like that is, what would that actually do? How would that have an impact on students and their parents? So lemme start right here, Michael, what’s your thought on what such a constitutional amendment would actually do to education in the state of California?

MICHAEL BORGES: Yeah, I mean, it’s an… lemme get a little closer…. It’s an interesting question because I think that’s part of what is to be determined, right? And I will say, just to be very clear speaking for the California Teacher Association here, right? We have a member driven process where we take positions on ballot measures. We don’t have a position on this measure, we don’t have for most of these that we’re gonna talk about. So I wanna give that disclaimer upfront just because I’m respectful of our member democracy and how that works.

But I do think that, to your question, Rich, I think that that is part of what we struggle with as an association, which is, we have 160 year history of advocating for students, right? Of advocating for better standards in public education. And I think that we currently have a system where the decisions are made by elected school board officials, elected legislators, elected members of statewide constitutional officers.

And the how here I think is always unclear and we’re wary that if it’s gonna be something just to turn it over to the judicial system, that this is about a private right to action, right? To be able to sue districts, the state whomever it might be, county boards… to force changes on who knows what on a number of issues. I mean, if you can really think about it, anything related to education being having to go in front of a court seems like a bad way to make performance and changes in our education system when we have a democratic system to make those changes all along the way.

RE: Scott, I’ll pose the same question to you. What is the potential in your mind of such a ballot measure?

SCOTT RICHARDS: Great, great question. I think well one, I would say the idea that every student in California has a right to an equitable and excellent education, I think is a commitment we can and should make [laughter] as educators and Californians. And I think there’s a lot of people doing a lot of work to ensure that that happens.

I think with this, what I understand, I think similar and we also teach where you don’t have a position on ballot measures typically. But I think it’s an important conversation to have. And I think that what I would be interested in understanding more, and I think for the public to understand is what would be different on Wednesday morning when we wake up and we have a constitutional right to an equitable and excellent education? What will be different in our schools and our communities and who’s gonna benefit from that?

And I think that we should be thinking about that. ‘Cause I don’t think anybody, at least that I know in California is gonna say like, “no, that that’s not something that we want for our kids and in our communities.” But who is this empowering? And what’s the strategy after that? I think that we have a long and rich history in California in the US when there is… When there are laws in the books and fighting for civil rights through the courts. And I think that we have a rich history of that.

“If you’re making now schools, maybe one of the last safe spaces for some of these folks, unsafe, then we know it’s gonna have just detrimental impacts” – Michael Borges

But I think I would wanna understand what is that… What is this gonna mean for us in our schools in our communities, and what’s gonna be different and who who’s gonna benefit from that at the end of the day?

RE: You know, there are a number of other proposed ballot measures that deal with whether we call them social justice issues or, I know one of our guests earlier:” human rights issues,” culture war issues that deal with things like requiring schools to notify parents about their students’ choice of gender identity and pronouns, that kind of thing. Barring biological males from competing in certain sports. Things around bathroom use, all these things. Weigh in a little bit on how those impact education. Are those things that are detrimental to education? Are they positive to education in some way?

Michael, let me start with you this time. I know you say you don’t take positions on ballot measures, but I’m sure these are things that you’re paying attention to.

MB: Sure. Absolutely. And some of this stuff, because some of these fights are happening already at the local level, right? Even if not statewide ballot measures yet. But you know, really for us, this starts from the simple place of, schools should be safe and welcoming spaces for all kids, period, full stop, right?

So when you start to get into these places where you’re talking about forced outing policies, right? That have no regard as to whether it is a safe space for that child, right? To have that conversation with their parent or guardian, when it is just mandated a hundred percent of the way to put educators or administrators or whomever it’s gonna be in the way, and potentially put a child safety at risk, that’s gonna be something that we’re always gonna stand against.

Panel 3 – LOOK AHEAD: BALLOT MEASURES AND LEGISLATION. Rich Ehisen, Michael Borges, Christina Laster, Scott Richards. Photo by Scott Duncan, Capitol Weekly

Because we just do feel that schools are… might be, we know that there is a crisis right amongst… especially if we’re talking about these forced outing policies, right? A crisis among bullying of our trans youth, a crisis of suicide among our trans youth. And if you’re making now schools, maybe one of the last safe spaces for some of these folks, unsafe, then we know it’s gonna have just detrimental impacts across the state. And we have been, I will just say very clearly at the local level, been organizing and fighting against these types of policies at the local level through the judicial process. And I would anticipate if these were to come through on the statewide level, we would oppose those as well.

RE: I’ll just move down the line here, Christina.

CL: So I work with the population of families and parents that are the ones that people typically don’t listen to. And it’s typically the Black parents and families and the Special Education parents and families. And this issue has not come up, from the perspective of where they’re concerned. I think that they’re concerned overall with their child’s physical and social safety. And so I really can’t speak as to what the parents are asking for or requesting within this initiative or bill or proposal. But I can say that it’s not something that comes up in our typical conversations because they’re trying to avoid all of the other issues that they face on a day-to-day basis.

RE: Thank you. Scott.

SR: Yeah. I think that’s a really interesting insight [laughter] around what you hear parents talking about. I think my first thought is, I just think about the human element of this. When we talk about trans students and LGBTQ students and families that have children that are trans or LGBTQ. It’s complex, it’s nuanced. I think that there are a lot of issues and challenges that families and students from those communities face.

“What kind of keeps me up at night or wakes me up is that learning loss from years of a covid pandemic wiped away about 10 years of progress for kids in communities across California” – Scott Richards

And so I think sometimes when we’re talking about this, we talk about it through policies or mechanisms or kind of like the mechanics of things. And I think that there is a real human element of a lived experience of what it’s like to be in a California school or in the US as a trans or LGBTQ student. I think what that makes me think is like, I would like to see regardless of if a ballot measure passed or not like what I think the real issue is, is like how are we supporting teachers, administrators in being in classrooms and supporting and creating a safe and learning environment for every student? I think the commitment that we should have should be clear that regardless of who you are as a student, regardless of if you’re a trans student or a LGBTQ student, that when you come to school, there’s a safe learning environment for you to learn and grow as a student. I think we should honor that commitment.

And I think it’d be like more clear and say from my… Our perspective, I don’t think any initiative that… or policy or law that we are talking about for all of California should target or discriminate against any particular student or group of students. I just don’t think that that’s the approach that we should be taking.

And my other thought, kind of what you were talking about is, I’m glad you said what parents are talking about. And maybe it’s just virtue of the circles that I’m in or that we’re in. Like, I don’t know… I know that in the culture war conversations, this comes up a lot. But in other spaces not as much. And what kind of keeps me up at night or wakes me up is that learning loss from years of a covid pandemic wiped away about 10 years of progress for kids in communities across California.

That was progress that was hard earned over 10 years, incrementally, I might add. One to 2% of growth per year that was wiped out in a matter of a year or two. That should be front and center of our mind when we think about what are the conversations we’re having and who is most disproportionately impacted by that learning loss. We know that it is communities of color. We know that it is trans and LGBTQ students or foster kids or homeless kids – that should be front and center.

And then I also think what I hear a lot of conversation about is just the state of, or the strength of our educator workforce in California. We hear the words teacher shortage or teacher retention. Like we don’t have… We don’t even have enough folks to be in classrooms leading those safe, thriving learning environments now. And we don’t really have a pipeline to that over the next few years. And we also don’t have a diverse teacher pipeline.

And so I would put… If I were thinking about if I could wave my magic wand, like what would we be talking about? I would be talking about those things and centering the conversation that every student in California, regardless of where you grow up or your background, that you can come to school, you’ll get an excellent, equitable education. You’ll feel like you belong there. You have adults that care about you. You have administrators that care about you, and you’ll be prepared for a future in the community where you were born and raised.

RE: You know, some of the conversation that we’ve been having throughout this day is a lot of it actually has dealt with this the tension between local and state control. And I’m listening, I was listening to Superintendent Thurman and talking about proposals he has to… And others… to pass a personal finance course in order to graduate from high school or teaching math and reading or computer science requirements to graduate from high schools. And it really does bring up the question of, okay, not that any of those are bad or un-laudable goals… but it does beg the question, okay, [laughter] that would seem to compromise the local control of what does fit an actual curriculum?

So I guess the question is where are we at in terms of how much top-down stuff is really applicable given what you’re talking about, Scott, with how things have changed some, but especially by Covid and where students actually are right now today. Lemme start down on this end again, Michael. I mean, are all these things a good thing? Are they things that the locals aren’t doing and we really need to just kick ’em in the butt and make ’em do it? Or is this just like, “Hey, back off, man.” [chuckle]

MB: I mean, I think there is a balance there. But probably the default is a little bit towards local control, right? And when we think about our local school districts being kind of the closest to democracy, if you will, right? The smaller electorate, smaller pools closer to the schools, closer to the voters, closer to the parents, closer to the students, that I think there’s a better nexus for good decision making there. And for that to happen. But there is a role for the state as well. Quite frankly on this stuff, when we talk about teacher shortage and all that sort of stuff, we know we’re not gonna parcel tax our way out at the local level from this problem, right? In terms of resourcing our public schools. That leadership has to come from the statewide level.

Some of these… I do think in some places too, and this ties into the culture war stuff as well, sometimes, where if there are local policies that are impacting students really in a really harmful way, then there is also a role for the state to step in here to think through, How do we either protect these students or get better outcomes and make sure that our education system is functioning if things are kind of going off the rails at the local level? So probably not answering it so directly, but I think that’s a little bit of the checks and balances that we do have built into our system.

RE: Well, Christina I’m really interested to hear your perspective on this, because I think you might have a perspective as a parent, here.

CL: Yeah, it’s interesting because there’s not a lot of parent representation in discussions like this. And I mean that’s just what, in every space from the Federal all the way down, right? And so I look at it as hearing this discussion about community goals, well, nationally that’s been… There’s a lot of data out on that from 20 years plus, right? Are we looking at the inputs or are we looking at the outputs? And I think what parents and families are concerned most about are outputs, right?

Having the conversation about all of the inputs that are necessary to make it happen, not so much, I think that it’s, what’s gonna come out of that. And so even looking at something like the reauthorizations of the, say, Elementary and Secondary Education Act, it starts to sound like a good sounding policy statement, but then we start to think of where is the implementation? How are the outcomes gonna be calculated? How are we gonna be able to measure adequate yearly progress on that? And what is it really going to look like as it functions? And does the State of California have the capacity, ability and resources to carry all of those things out… implementation enforcement and monitor outcomes, right?

“We’re always gonna run into an issue, it’s gonna take people to do that work. We have a hard time finding people, and we have a hard time keeping people” – Michael Borges

And so it all sounds like that good sounding policy statement, but how is it actually gonna function and can we get the things that are proposed to function into perpetuity? Are we gonna be dusting stuff off the shelf and 5 or 10 years saying, Let’s try this again, right? Like whole child approaches are not new, there’s a lot of research about it. We can look at all of the domains and social determinants of health and all of that, but what is it going to produce? And that is our perspective from the parent realm and spaces that I’m in.

RE: Scott let me… The same question but framing it maybe from the perspective of, I mean, it would have been nice to have a personal finance teacher when I was in high school a billion years ago, but are we equipped to have teachers teaching personal finance? I mean, that seems like a really… It’s right in the term “personal finance,” so how equipped are we to do some of these things that might get mandated by these?

SR: I don’t know, I hope this sounds nicer than it is, but I think I know some teachers who would like to take a personal finance class given how much they make, so. But I think… So then I think she kinda still my funder around implementation. [laughter] I was like, I’m gonna say implementation, but I think we’ve done a number of big things like Communities In Schools, ELOP Funding. Now, Transitional Kindergarten, and putting a lot of money into it. I think things that I would be proud that we’re doing those things in California, but it will come down to implementation. Like finding enough teachers to do transitional kindergarten or the arts investment, arts investment programs.

That’s what I hear schools and LEAs talking about is like, How are we actually gonna implement these things? There’s a pile of money in extended learning that hasn’t been utilized yet because we’re trying to figure out how to use that. And I’m only mentioning those things because when I thought about your question, like personal finance, I mean the answer… Yes, I wish I would add a class that.

I look at my own kids, I have all four but my oldest is now in college, but my kids are all in school, and I’m like, Yes, learning personal finance would be great. That’d be a great idea.

Computer Science, or even computer language and computer programming. I think it’d be great – this is my own opinion, not TFA – but the… If there was a computer language as a second language that would set up kids for putting them on a path to different opportunities. I think the challenge we have is around, how do we implement that? How do we actually make that happen on the ground in schools?

And we’re always gonna run into an issue, it’s gonna take people to do that work. We have a hard time finding people, and we have a hard time keeping people. It’s not… I think they’re related. The teacher shortage is not just ’cause we don’t know where people are. It’s also when they spend a couple of years in the school system, they’re like, “I would rather do something else.” Or even we do a lot of recruiting. I think even as we’re in college campuses and talking to potential folks that want to consider a career in education, there’s so many other options now. And they look at what’s happening and what we’re talking about. Like from all the things, and they’re like, “I could do something else to make a difference in the world.”

So there’s actually the conditions in the school, so I don’t know, one part of me says, “Yes, I would like us to do those things.” But I think in California, we have a real issue when it comes to, do we have the people and the talent to actually do those things? I think we know the answer – We just don’t. We just don’t have that, and I think we should be thinking about how we build an educator workforce for the future. And devote a lot of time, a lot of time to that.

The last thing I’d say on this too, is I was mentioning COVID before, COVID didn’t just kinda create inequities. I think a lot of us know that it exposed long-standing inequities and disparities in schools. And so I remember this moment we had of like, what’s the new normal? A reimagined education, or the future education?

I think when I read a couple of lines below, I was like… To your point, are we reimagining things, are we just kinda trouting out things we tried 10 years ago that we change the label of it or it’s something different now. And I think that what… What that makes me think is us as a community as people is like how do we all come together find a way to work together and think about what is the real future of education for our kids? What is gonna prepare them for the future for opportunities in California and the LCFF question.

It’ll probably look different by community, I grew up in Central Valley, I grew up in a small town in the Central Valley. And I think the pathways, the opportunity looked different there than my peers who grew up in LA or the Bay Area. It just looked different, not that we can’t all go pursue the same things, but I think opportunities there look different.

So, I think there’s power in how we think about school governance and distributing resources, but I would center students, this next generation, Gen Z and the next generation that’s coming up. Like, how are we preparing them to be leaders in our world of these institutions and organizations we build, that’s where I would… That’s where I put my focus on. Again, if I could wave my magic wand, which I left in my backpack, but I’m happy to bring it out.

RE: There’s another proposal that would establish education savings accounts where a parent or guardian could… if they had an eligible student, they would receive $17,000 in public funds, and that could be used then to enroll that student in a private institution, including religious institution, or even homeschooling. Now, the reason I asked about the impact on this is because this is the kind of thing coming at a time when we’ve been talking about declining enrollment, which is directly tied to school funding.

So what impact do you see something like that having if it passes? My initial reaction is, “Well, this is probably gonna be really tilted towards one socioeconomic group over others,” but I don’t know, you guys have know a lot more than I do. Scott, let me start with you, this time will work this way, what’s your thought when you hear a proposal like that, and its possible impact?

SR: Glad you started with me, this is the one I was like, I might have less to say about education savings accounts. But here’s how I think about it, we don’t really have Teach For America, an official position on that. But as a parent or maybe a community member, when I think about this, I think a lot about the role and value of public education.

I went to a public school growing up, I went to a public university here in California, which I’m proud of and happy that I went to a public university. My kids go to public schools. I come from a long line of people that taught in public schools, so my mom retired in Fresno Unified my aunt retired in LA Unified, my dad, my grandma taught. Literally… it’s everybody’s been something in public education. It took me about 15 years to figure out I wanted to do something in education, but I followed in the footsteps, I think… I think that we should be thinking about how might that or might not undermine or support how we’re strengthening schools in our communities that provide an education for every child in that community?

“We look at it from the perspective of, were they being offered what they needed in their local community? And do they have what they need for their children to thrive now?” – Christina Laster

I think about one example here in Sacramento of somebody I knew who wanted to send her kids to her local school. That’s what she wanted to do…. Local Elementary School, right in Downtown Sacramento. And she used her resources, people that she knows, the school had closed down. Should have said that important point, the school was not open. And so she organized people in our community and ran a campaign to reopen that elementary school in Downtown Sacramento, Washington Elementary, in case some of you know it. And today it’s a thriving school in downtown Sacramento.

And I think when I think about public education or how we’re educating kids in our communities, I think that reflects more of what I want. What I want my own kids to be a part of, how I wanna be involved in my community. That’s what I would value. So I know that’s a long way around education savings accounts, but I think I am cautious around things that might take away from how we invest and build a great public education system.

Panel 3 – LOOK AHEAD: BALLOT MEASURES AND LEGISLATION. Rich Ehisen, Michael Borges, Christina Laster, Scott Richards. Photo by Scott Duncan, Capitol Weekly

I don’t know, I remember… I didn’t remember this growing up, but the California, one of the best public education systems in the country at one point, before… I don’t know was it the ’70s? Somebody can help me on the history, we had that. My parents went to schools in that, and I think that’s something that’s possible. I think that’s what I’d like to see.

RE: Christina, I’ll ask you the same question. How would you see something like that impacting your world?

CL: So, you’ve mentioned declining enrollment rates. And the part of the discussion that needs to be looked at, is why the declining, right? Everybody didn’t just move away, right?

And so you already have parents that have made a decision by voting with their feet. And to say that those parents don’t deserve the support, because I know that there was a 18% rise in Black homeschoolers. And so we look at it from the perspective of, were they being offered what they needed in their local community? And do they have what they need for their children to thrive now?

“Education Savings Accounts are just vouchers 2.0.” – Michael Borges

I trust the parents, and I respect the parents as a voting block that will be able to make a decision with regards to what is best for their children. And so since I do support those rise in homeschoolers in helping them to navigate the resources that are available. I support their ability to say, “We need a little bit of help here.” If they can’t go to the local school for various reasons that we know exist like discrimination, and safety based on that discrimination, and they choose to leave to provide their children whatever better that they can, and I think that the state has an obligation to support that. Because they already tried the local school and it may not have worked out.

Now on the other hand, like you mentioned that situation in Sacramento. I wish that parents in Oakland could’ve did the same thing, but they couldn’t and they tried. And so now, where are they gonna go? And so there has to be not just one thing. I think that we need to look innovatively and forward, at how can we support children and families overall. And if they wanna vote for the savings account, not saying that that’s something that I’m gonna go vote for, I’m just saying like, I support the parent, and they’ve already started voting with their feet.

MB: I might be the most unequivocal on this one, which is, these Education Savings Accounts are just vouchers 2.0. These are tried and failed campaigns that we’ve seen across the country, but even worse, when it comes here. And you don’t have to take my word on this in terms of the LAO fiscal analysis is actually out on this ballot measure already, and it’ll tell you that it’s $10 billion per year out of the public education system like that. Overnight. Basically to subsidize folks who are already sending their kids to private schools and religious schools.

So our education system can’t take that, right? That is not… And that is just a year one, that is not what this means over the long run, as we are subsidizing folks to send their kids to private schools. And a little bit like Scott, I was actually born and raised in Tulare, so I know what it’s like being from the Central Valley and where there actually really aren’t private schools even as an option, right? So we’re basically gonna be taking this money that is our tax dollars meant to support all of our students in our public education system and cherry picking and handing it out for folks to subsidize their private school education.

And on the point around discrimination and safety without any of the rules and any of the protections that we currently have in our public schools. So it specifically in the measure says that there can’t be a requirement that teachers even need a credential to teach in these schools who are getting these accounts. It specifically says that you can actually make decisions based on a person’s religious affiliation as to whether or not they can be a student or a staff member at these schools, so we lose all kinds of protections while we’re defunding our public school systems, and it’s just a full-frontal attack on public education.

RE: You were correct, unequivocal.

Speaking about equivocal, State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Tony Thurmond was our keynoter today, and I asked him the same question I’m about to ask you, which is: A proposal to make his position, an appointed one by the Governor as opposed to an elected one. And it is in the California state constitution that that’s an elected position, but so it would require a constitutional change. What are you guys’ thoughts on this?

I think we saw one of the earlier panels, one of our panelists opined very much maybe in favor of that. Clearly the current superintendent, not in favor of that. What are your thoughts on this? So would this benefit students in any way, to have the Governor essentially be able to hand pick a person and implement policy through his or her office through that person. Or is it better to have this superintendent’s position be elected and somewhat independent of the governor? Michael, I’ll start here this time.

MB: I’ll be relatively quick on this one, which is, we oppose any efforts to make it an appointed position. Just generally we believe that it should be as it is now, both elected and actually non-partisan as well. Just so that it… To try and not politicize our public schools even more so we’re pretty clear that we would oppose the bill, we think the current system is the best system.

RE: Christina?

Christina Laster: Yeah, I do have to agree on that. I mean, it’s a simple answer. If I know that I’m going to get rewarded for doing my job, I’m gonna do my job. And I’m gonna try to do it better each time so that I can continue to receive that reward, and the reward is that the people are gonna acknowledge that you’re doing your job and they’ll continue to vote, right? And so that’s the easiest way that I can put it. And then changing that to an appointment can easily turn into something that is tied to political agendas and along party lines. And really essentially undermine the vote, and the people’s ability to vote on positions like that. So I agree with that.

SR: I think part what I heard in part of your question was how would that impact students?

RE: Yeah, really? How would such gonna impact students?

SR: I’m totally unclear how that would impact students, but what I would say is my understanding of how our state works is that the State Board of Education sets policy and determines the rules and guidelines for California, and the superintendent’s responsible for implementing those. So I don’t know that a whole lot changes, and I don’t know… I don’t know, if that’s a good or bad thing at this point.

I mean, I think I echo a lot of things just as somebody, as a resident of California, like I favor the idea of an elected person in a position that does not feel partisan. But I have questions around what’s the problem we’re trying to define or solve in that move? Like I say, I probably said it once before, I think the problems and challenges in our schools live really, primarily on the fact that our kids are not doing well academically, socially, emotionally not doing well, and I have a hard… When I think about things like this… I’m not gonna pick on this bill, ’cause I don’t know that much about it. But when I think about what we’re doing and talking about in education, I get really present to what I see in schools, what I hear principals and teachers and administrators talking about.

“Nobody should lose their child based on a heat wave in physical education” – Christina Laster

And I think that I would like to see us more and more start whatever work we’re doing from, “how do we show up for kids right now?” What does that look like for us to do right now in this moment? And I know all of us will say, “Well, we are. We are doing… ” I don’t mean there’s people that aren’t. I’m not saying that, but I think we should be focused on what is that? And right now, I think it’s clear in my mind what the challenges are. So I would welcome any change at an executive level like that that would solve that, but I would wanna understand more about the theory and ideas behind it.

RE: I think… Well, first of all, before we want anything else here. I threw out some of the ones that we’ve seen. Are there any others? Any proposals? The superintendent brought up a few, I wasn’t even aware of, but… So are there other proposals out there that you’re really paying attention to? Wherever they’re at in the stage of development that we ought to know about?

CL: Yeah, so I’m working with families in Southern California that are seeking dynamic and robust changes to the physical education… altogether. And that came out of a death, tragic loss that one of the families that I’m close to and advocating for received on a day that there was a heat wave and their child died on that day at PE.

And so we’re looking at this physical education criteria and asking, is it really necessary, and in this way? And does it really produce the outcomes in health and wellness to change the social determinants of health, Anyway, right? Is it providing the academic support that is needed or could we be utilizing that time?

And this is not a new conversation. I’ve seen a lot of expert opinions about this. And some of the expert opinions that need to be paid attention to is weather conditions and changes; the heat index; and how bodies are heating and cooling during these extreme weather and inclement weather conditioas. And I don’t think we’ve paid enough attention to it.So I support the parents in advocating for those robust changes.

And even an evaluation to take place about PE and its outcomes, about weather changes, and are we following the API, the heat index, and listening to the scientists and medical practitioners that have given robust information about the changes that need to be taking place with physical activity.

And so those are the things that as parents we’re driving that, because nobody should lose their child based on a heat wave in physical education, right? And so there has to be some uniform guideline with regards to how to deal with heat waves. I’m sure we’re gonna probably get more and we’ll see what happens with the cold front that comes in. But there needs to be uniform guidelines.

And right now, you know, 89 when I was a child isn’t the 89 we felt today. You know, there is a difference. And then after COVID, I noticed a rise in asthma and a lot of parents coming to me and saying my child has breathing issues and they can’t do PE. Can they do something else? Can they go to the computer lab and work on work? Well, I don’t find that to be unreasonable, right?

Like they’re asking to do another academic activity and if they are able to meet the standards, open sequence of physical education a different way I think that’s a one way that we can transform that hour, you know.

And so those are discussions that I’m having with parents and unfortunately with the family that lost their child and I don’t think it’s anything that’s outside of something that is reasonable and rational to look at and there’s tons of information in support of what I’m saying.

RE: Are you working on that with a lawmaker on legislation or a possible ballot measure?

CL: We’re hoping that someone will sponsor that and even if it’s at the federal level, we’re, you know, aiming for that because if you look across the nation, there is no uniform weather condition guidelines. It’s in… particularly, I mean, this is something that’s so simple, right? With heat waves and temperature and the changing heat index – the doctors and scientists have been screaming from their field, “watch this.” And it just hasn’t connected in education and it hasn’t connected with regards to the social determinants of health and education is one of them.

So I believe that someone will be more than glad to sponsor it. We’re just gonna continue to advocate for that change.

RE: Michael and Scott, I’ll throw the same question to you. What are you watching for to maybe show up as introduced legislation or maybe somebody filing a ballot measure sometime soon?

Michael Borges: Well, hopefully we’re getting to the end of the ballot measure season. It’s pretty late if people are filing now, but I do think the one that for us, because we recently took an opposed position on it as the California Business Roundtable has its measure, the Taxpayer Protection Act that they tried to qualify for two years ago, that’ll be on the ballot in next November, a year from now. And really that’s just an attack on all of our public services, both at the state level, taking away the power of the purse from the legislature, and making sure that or making it so that all taxes and fees have to go to a vote of the people. You could see ourselves in an economy that doesn’t look like the one, well, maybe even the one right now, right?

But in a place of crisis, right? Where the legislature might need to raise taxes or do what it needs to do to bring revenues in, but it can’t be enacted because it needs to go to the voters which can only go in general elections now, right? Or generally, if it’s voter-referred, it goes November, but waiting to the cycle for the ballot measure to actually come up and vote and would see draconian cuts to all of our public services, as well as public services at the local level. Generally, that’s not public education, right? But could bleed into all of these budgets across the state. So that is one that we’re taking seriously.

RE: Scott, how about you?

SR: Yeah, there’s like two categories of things that are on my mind. One, there’s a set of bills that are related to educator workforce development. I wrote them down. AB934, AB238. And then there’s a Senate Bill 765.

I mentioned these because I think that they are new or interesting ways to think about how to address workforce challenges in education. One of those is that student teachers are paid a stipend or paid more money for the work that they do.

The other is about pay for retired teachers. My mom’s a retired teacher. I think she talked to me about this one, so, go mom.

But I think in terms of identifying workforce opportunities to think about how we invest in schools. The other is interesting. I’ll say it’s interesting, but the Senate Bill, I believe it’s Senate Bill, is talking about how to actually recruit and identify like almost “market” education in California to kind of the next generation coming up.

And that’s my quick summary of it. The reason I think that matters is because so many people, young people are choosing careers outside of education. And I mentioned this before already that just because of all of the kind of the fighting and the politics, kind of the messiness of education. And I think we need to take a good, long, hard look at current college students and the work we’re doing to connect them to opportunities and careers in education.

“We should be proud as California that we put aside that money and invest in the schools” – Scott Richards

One of the things that we did at TFA, we developed like early in the pandemic, just ask school partners like, “hey, what is something we could do to support you now? Like in this very moment.” And we stood up a high dose, high impact tutoring program that provides tutors within schools, within school hours to support students that those schools identified needed that tutoring.

We pay them a stipend. They’re trained, they’re coached, they’re supported over that time. They’re current college students. And we tell them, this is like an introduction to like what this work could look like for the rest of your life. And I think that they’re working with teachers, they’re working with kids, and they can make a choice after that if they wanna choose any number of different routes in education.

I think that’s a way we thought about how do we tap into Gen Z? And I mentioned all those things because I would like to see some of these things move forward and anything around, how do we really think about the rising or emerging generation, those Gen Zs out there that we know could be a powerful part of our schools and our communities.

The second is related and it’s around extended learning opportunity dollars. I believe there’s about four to five billion dollars that’s sitting in that across all California schools. Most of it is unused. And I’m not sure, when we face a fiscal cliff in the coming months, when we find out like how we’re really doing. Like what might happen to those ELOP dollars. That’s money that schools can spend on things like tutoring or learning loss recovery.

We should be proud as California that we put aside that money and invest in the schools. Like I think that’s to our credit. I think we also need to figure out how do we put that to its best use. And now when we’re facing this fiscal cliff idea, I’ve heard it is described, how are we ensuring that we’re using that to honor that commitment we made to those schools and communities. And I think the other side of that, and I cannot think of a bill related to this, but I’m just, it’s my wishlist. But I would say anything we can do to secure and keep that.

And also figure out how we uplift programs and services that are doing that work and support them and make sure that they have the resources they need to meet those, like, in the world of education, tier two interventions, targeted interventions for kids that will support and help make up the ground for learning loss.

RE: I’m gonna ask one more before we open it up to some questions. So definitely if you have any, get them ready. We’ve talked a lot today about implementation. You know, and the devil’s often in the details, right? Of how you implement these policies. And so I’m thinking not just of stuff that’s pending maybe to go before lawmakers, but things that have already been passed that have yet to be implemented. And I’m thinking of bills like AB1078. I know they were talking about that in one of the earlier panels. The Safe Place to Learn Act, which would require the State Board of Education to establish policies for local districts to follow before they change curriculum or remove books, etcetera.

There was another bill that should have passed on outlying, suspending students over willful defiance and things like that, that have yet to be put into place. Christina, let me start with you again. What are some of the things like that? Maybe that you are really looking at with the closest eye right now?

CL: So I’m, I felt set up a little bit, okay. What I look at actually is, is the LCFF fully implemented, right? Like seriously, with looking at the progress rates, yearly progress rates, and how do we shift those into higher amounts, right? A lot of times I’ll look at the local control funding formula, LCAP, and the rate of progress that I see proposed is not something that I find to be one that will produce outcomes in the way that the plan states.

And so, the County Office of Education can give guidance and all of that wonderful stuff, but who is really making sure that those measures are looked at in a real way to produce the vital changes that are necessary and to make sure that those goals and measures are set to the population that they’re supposed to serve, right?

“If a Black student has just one Black teacher in elementary school, at some point in their elementary career, they are more likely to go to and graduate from college. Just one.” – Scott Richards

One of the other things that I have a lot of complaints around is special education. And I believe as a society, we just don’t do well with having the discussions around special education. And parents are saying, my IEP is just not working for me. My 504 is just not working for me. What is it that I do? And then when I ask for support, I’m told to go to an outside of the education system agency for the support, because there’s no capacity to fully implement or carry those out.

And so, I think my asks are very small and reasonable, but they’re something that need to be done and something that need to be looked at over time. And that is within the population of parents that I serve, and their requests are reasonable.

RE: Scott, we’ll work our way back this way. So, Scott, what is yet to be implemented that you’re paying the most attention to?

SR: Yet to be implemented. That’s a good question. I feel like I might say more of what I’ve already said. I was gonna go a different direction on your other question. Can you repeat your first question that you asked her?

RE: Well, I mean, there’s lots of bills that have been passed and signed a lot, but they haven’t been implemented yet. And so, is there anything in particular you’re watching very closely to see how it does get implemented?

SR: I mean, I think the one that I’m particularly interested around like disciplinary action on schools. And I think, I felt like part of what was, what I interpret your question as, is like, as we’ve talked about these things, like, where is there hope? That’s kind of what I read into your question. And where are we seeing, kind of a light at the end of the tunnel.

And I think there are things that we’re doing that we know can and should work. And I think around specifically in so many districts where there has been disproportionate suspension rates, expulsion rates for Black students in particular. I think we have, I think we know enough now to know that when we think about different approaches to discipline, or even just don’t use the word discipline, but think about other approaches to how we are building a learning environment, investing in kids, building relationships. That that proves to matter for a kid’s success academically. Like it actually makes a huge difference.

And I think secondly, related to that is anything around, in particular, investments in diversifying the educator workforce. We also know enough that if a student in California, this is research in California – if a Black student has just one Black teacher in elementary school, at some point in their elementary career, they are more likely to go to and graduate from college. Just one. Not talking about all 12 years, just one.

And that’s a challenge for us in California. Think about the diversity of our student body, over 70% identify as people of color and our educator workforce overwhelmingly identifies as white. We need to think about that. And what does that mean for the experiences the vast majority of our kids are having in a school? And really put thought to that.

So I think the disciplinary, the measures and the bills and work, I think is good. I think it’s a good step in the right direction. And I think it addresses many of like the underlying “belonging” issues that students have. I think secondly, I keep an eye towards like, what are we doing to diversify the educator workforce that really reflects students and communities in California?

RE: Michael, what’s your perspective?

MB: I’ll be super quick on this one. I do think, and folks mentioned earlier, but I think the implementation around Community Schools will still be something to really watch, right? Because I think that we’ve seen in some places a real top-down model. We’ve seen in some places where literally a third-party nonprofit has just been kind of handed the keys and be like, “all right, tell us what a community school is,” right?

And I think that that’s actually perversing the model, right, which is really trying to go back and be granular, right, with parents, with community, with the local educators, with the administrators, right? And really build out a school that addresses the needs of its particular students more effectively, versus a lot of just top-down, something that someone grabbed from another state or another district, right? Because that’s really not the model then, right? We’re perverting what it’s supposed to be about that local democracy and local control.

Panel 3 – LOOK AHEAD: BALLOT MEASURES AND LEGISLATION. Rich Ehisen, Michael Borges, Christina Laster, Scott Richards. Photo by Scott Duncan, Capitol Weekly

RE: Well, we can open it up to questions now. If anyone’s got a question or if anything came in online, we’re happy to take a question while you have, we got a few minutes left here, if anyone’s got one.

TIM FOSTER: I do have one question. So right now, truancy and attendance is a significant problem in California. It was already not great, and then during the pandemic, it really got much, much, much worse. And one of the earlier panels talked about how resources are allocated in California by attendance, not by people who are actually registered in the school, but by the actual number of kids who are showing up.

So is that something that can be addressed at a legislative level, or is that gonna have to be addressed on a district level, or what do you see would be the best approach to that? And is that something that is really being discussed that you’re aware of in the coming year?

CL: So I’ll go ahead and answer that. I mean, if you look at the way that the law functions and the truancy rules and SAR, like we’re talking about that compulsory education law again, right? And how to enforce that. And if we see that the law hasn’t really produced the outcome of making children go to school more, because the consequence isn’t really something that is provoking the outcome, right? Then how are local districts rewarding attendance? Or incentivizing and supporting through the necessary resources that parents need?

I mean, the communities across the state are shifting, demographics are shifting, and a lot of that along the lines of income, right? And some of these problems can’t be solved within schools, but that deep dive needs to be taking place before the consequence to see how can we provide of an incentive for you to be able to bring your child to school? Because if a person has to decide whether they’re gonna be able to drive those miles every day or go to work, where’s the support gonna come from?

And that’s a deeper dive that districts have to take to look at what is the variables that are causing students to be truant. Because there’s no blanket reason, right? It could be homelessness, it could be transition. People are doubled up. That’s considered homelessness under the McKinney-Vento Act, right? You have families that are doubling up to try to help each other, but do they necessarily have the transportation and the means or whatever is necessary to make sure the child goes to school every day? And so I think like looking at that way to incentivize instead of the consequences, the consequences aren’t currently working is a way forward for local districts.

SR: Is this on? All right. I would like to your question, like I think this is something that I have heard people talking about. I think it’s something we must talk about, especially that we’re facing, we’re just kind of coming up to this kind of financial cliff.

My understanding is the way that that ADA works now is it’s the average of the prior three years is what funds a current school. And that would include now at least one year of during the COVID pandemic. And so, and that coupled with declining enrollment over time and if we’re using that same measure, we’re probably gonna see less resources invested into schools that need them the most. And that’s gonna put us in a tight bind where LEAs are gonna have to start making difficult decisions around staffing programs, resources, all the things Christine’s talking about that, if everything’s firing in all cylinders or helping ensure kids, families know what to do and kids get to school and all those things connect.

I think it’s a real issue. And I know as a state, we’re also gonna be up against having to make some tough decisions financially. And so I don’t know. I mean, I think you did a great job of like, what are all the factors that go into that? That just makes me think about what the challenges are in ensuring every kid gets to school. And then I think the issue financially is. What I think about is that I don’t know that we’re gonna have all the resources we need to make that happen. And it is a legislative thing. I think we would have to think about legislatively, what do we do to address it?

BRIAN WHITE: Good afternoon, Brian White with KP Public Affairs. Appreciate the discussion. I wanna follow up on, I think Scott , the comments you made.. actually very pointed comments about expanding outreach for teachers to teach African-American students, young men of color, particularly young men of color. And it’s not just getting African-American teachers, particularly for young males, it’s getting Black male teachers. That’s one thing that I would like to know your thoughts about how Teach for America is doing some outreach. Are you visiting historically Black colleges and universities or other places where you can provide incentives for young Black males to teach?

SR: Yeah, I appreciate the question. Yes. We do a lot of outreach and recruitment, like one of our kind of major focus areas… and then what we do is recruiting on college campuses. And we certainly are in HBCUs and recruiting talent, especially around Black male teachers in particular. We also have a fund for Black teachers once they’re in Teach for America that supports Black educators staying in education beyond their time with Teach for America. And so that’s something any Black educator, not just Black males, but any Black educator in Teach for America can benefit from that resource ongoing, which helps pay down debt, goes to education expenses.

The other thing that I mentioned around like when it comes to recruiting in particular is like education’s expensive. And in California, I’m thinking about California, we’re a national organization, but in California, the cost of getting certified is prohibitive.

The time and the testing and all of that is cost prohibitive and can disproportionately impact in particular, Black educators, any person of color. And what we’ve done is add stipends on top of whatever salary a teacher might get through their district. So a stipend that covers transitional costs from testing to moving, to getting a down payment on an apartment, to buying clothes that you need to be a teacher. And there’s stipends on top of that that can go to cover ongoing certification costs.

So when I think about that, it is definitely about where we are recruiting and where we’re spending time and building relationships. I also think it’s about addressing structural issues in our economy and in our society that actually lower the barriers of entry in particular for Black educators.

RE: Well, we are actually out of time here. Do we have time for one more?

TF:  I think we’re at it.

RE: Yeah, okay. Sorry, you can come up and ask them after we’re done here, I think. Thank you all very much. Thanks to our great panel, Scott, Christina and Michael. Really great job. Thank you very much. Thank all of you for being here today. And I hope this was informative for everybody and we’ll see you at the next conference. Take care.

TF: Good job. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.

Thanks to our Conference on Education Policy sponsors: THE TRIBAL ALLIANCE OF SOVEREIGN INDIAN NATIONS, WESTERN STATES PETROLEUM ASSOCIATION, KP PUBLIC AFFAIRS, PERRY COMMUNICATIONS, CAPITOL ADVOCACY, LUCAS PUBLIC AFFAIRS, THE WEIDEMAN GROUP and CALIFORNIA PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS