Saratoga News

State education proposition makes local districts nervous

Measure sets limit on costs of administration

By John Pancharian

Given the chance, most people would vote to cut bureaucratic fat from the state's schools and redirect the money where the rubber meets the road, in classrooms and libraries. This, according to Tyrone Vahedi, is what his initiative, known as "95/5" or Proposition 223, will do. It will go to the voters in June and is currently ahead in the polls. But many organizations both statewide and local fear that 95/5 will actually deal a severe financial blow to many districts whose only crime is being small.

Proposition 223, also known as the "Education Efficiency Initiative," requires that at least 95 cents of every dollar collected by a school district be spent only on those programs and personnel with which students have direct involvement. On the flip side, no more than 5 cents may be spent on administrative costs--thus the "95/5" nickname. It also requires districts to undergo an audit every five years, at which time they must account for all expenditures made and demonstrate how they directly affect student achievement. Any district found in noncompliance with 95/5 would be fined $25 per student, or 5 percent of their revenue limit, whichever is greater.

"This initiative is meant to maximize every dollar taxpayers put into the system," said Vahedi, who is the head of Children's Rights 2000, a Los Angeles-based advocacy group. According to him, California schools spend about twice the national average on administrative costs, and the kids pay the price for this inefficiency. The ballot pamphlet argument in favor of 95/5 states that the initiative will shift at least half a billion dollars a year back to the schools without raising taxes and allow smaller class sizes, more teachers and increased spending on resources such as books and computers.

The argument ends, "Vote yes on Prop. 223 to put the money where the kids are."

But those opposing 95/5 contend it will put the money into the Los Angeles Unified School District--and hurt hundreds of smaller districts statewide. "Our problem with it is that the 5 percent is a purely arbitrary limit," said Rick Pratt, governmental relations representative for the California School Employees Association. He said larger districts such as the LAUSD will have a much easier time cutting their administration costs down to 5 percent because they have economies of scale working for them. He said it is likely many small districts will find themselves unable to comply with the initiative because they need to do all the same administrative tasks that larger districts do but lack the per student revenue. For these districts, Prop. 223 would take the same-size cut out of a smaller pie.

According to California law created by Proposition 98, any money that comes out of school funding--such as 95/5 fines--must somehow be returned to schools. Pratt fears this money will go to large districts that are in 95/5 compliance--such as LAUSD--in effect soaking small communities to benefit the behemoths. "This is why the LA school district likes it," he said. "It's an education Peripheral Canal, sending dollars south."

Local district officials start to sweat when they look at the potential impact if 95/5 passes. The current administration budget for Saratoga Union is about 8 percent, Los Gatos Union is 11.4 percent, Los Gatos-Saratoga Joint Union High School is 7.9 percent, Campbell Union is 7.6 percent and Campbell Union High School is about 8.5 percent, according to a report presented to the high school district board by the district's business manager, Dorothy Deikmann. Local district officials say they not only fear the fines they may have to pay if they cannot comply with 95/5, but also the cuts they may have to make to come into compliance.

"We'd be in a pickle," said Linda Latasa, business manager for the LGUSD, when she contemplated meeting the cut to 5 percent. "We'd have the superintendent and his secretary; we'd have to keep maintenance somehow; we might be able to get away with closing the cafeteria; we could keep one or two budget clerks; and everyone else would be gone. We'd have to fire a lot of people."

SUSD business manager Ellen Tipton explained that the language of the initiative includes in the category of "administration" any expense not directly benefiting the students. Thus, she said, if the district has to contract with any outside agency to control gophers, for example, this is counted in the 5 percent. Arguments against 95/5 by the Association of California School Administrators cite similar accounting oddities. Bob Wells, ACSA governmental relations representative, said that school bus mechanics would be considered administrators because they do not contact the children or work at a school site, while school bus drivers would be considered directly involved with students and fall into the 95 percent.

Were local districts to fall out of compliance, the dollar amounts of the penalties would be substantial. The state would fine the LGUSD $545,000, said Superintendent Bert Pearlman. Tipton said the SUSD would lose $464,000, and Deikmann said the high school district would lose $170 per student per year. "That would absolutely thwart our ability to make do," said Pearlman. "We'd see class sizes increase and services gone."

Vahedi responds that the state Board of Education provides waivers for districts that try in good faith to comply and cannot. But Patty Murphy, director of communication at the Santa Clara County Office of Education, said her research indicates otherwise. "The language is very clear," she said. "You're stuck with the fine."

[ Back to Contents Page | Saratoga News Home Page | Archives ]