اینترنت

نویسنده: post bot

  • Fresno Unified searches for ways to improve student, pedestrian safety

    Fresno Unified searches for ways to improve student, pedestrian safety


    San Juan Unified in Sacramento County implemented the Safe Routes to School initiative and other measures to address pedestrian safety, including the Charles Peck Elementary School “May the 4th be with you!” Walk to School Day.

    Credit: Courtesy of Civic Thread

    This story was updated to reflect Clovis Unified’s 2022-23 accident data that was provided after the story’s publication.

    As students waited for a bus in front of Roosevelt High School last September, a vehicle crashed into the bus stop, injuring 11 of them. The next day, a mom was walking her four children to school when a driver ran a traffic light, hitting the mom and dragging one of her children. They were using the crosswalk.

    These incidents represent a few of the many accidents involving students or pedestrians being hit by vehicles on or near Fresno Unified campuses between August and December. 

    “Those are the ones that made the news,” said Amy Idsvoog, executive officer for health services, safety and emergency response for Fresno Unified School District. 

    Many more incidents never made the news but can still be traumatizing for students and families, causing them to live in fear over their safety when getting to or leaving school. 

    “We saw a need even last year to try and do something,” Idsvoog said. 

    Fresno Unified district leaders, Idsvoog said, first noticed an uptick in the number of students being hit by cars in the 2022-23 school year when there were 17 incidents, including a death in October 2022. In the aftermath of the student’s death, board member Andy Levine acknowledged “the reality that our students are not safe when they step right off of campus,” and that the district needed to “make sure that never happens ever again.”

    Despite the district’s efforts to improve pedestrian safety, Fresno Unified is recording double-digit numbers of incidents for the second consecutive school year — nearing 20 incidents this school year with about six months of school remaining.  

    Fresno Unified, the state’s third-largest school district, with about 70,000 students, is trying to curb the frequency of accidents involving students being hit by vehicles by teaching students about pedestrian safety, displaying banners and materials on campuses and educating the wider community on the importance of the topic. 

    “It just seems to be something that is not stopping,” Fresno Unified Superintendent Bob Nelson said in late September after a student on her way to school was hit by a vehicle. “It just can’t continue to happen to our kids. Our kids deserve to be safe as they travel to and from school.” 

    Now the school district is working to implement the Safe Routes to School initiative to address pedestrian safety. 

    Fresno-area districts, organizations launched a campaign last school year

    Fresno Unified’s 17 vehicles vs. student/pedestrian incidents in the 2022-23 school year was up from seven in 2018-19, nine in 2019-20 and four in 2020-21. The district had zero reported incidents in 2021-22, when all students returned to in-person learning following the pandemic. 

    But there’s not a sole explanation for the increased number of incidents, Idsvoog said. 

    She explained that among many factors, possible causes include pedestrians not using crosswalks or doing so incorrectly, drivers not paying attention to a stop sign or traffic light in a school zone, as well as parents dropping students off in the middle of the street, rather than in a drop-off zone. The district has also seen a rising number of cases involving student drivers, including four this school year. 

    “No one can exactly come up with why yet,” she said. 

    Idsvoog said she learned from the Council of the Great City Schools, a coalition of 78 of the nation’s largest urban public school systems, that school districts across the nation have not found the answer either. 

    Nationally, some school districts have tried different methods to address pedestrian safety, including buying $20,000 speed monitoring displays, Idsvoog said. (Fresno Unified has at least two dozen schools with speed monitors requiring a battery replacement.) As of Jan. 1, thanks to new legislation across the state, six California cities will install automated speed cameras in school zones. 

    “I think everyone is trying to address the same problem,” Idsvoog said. “I don’t think there’s this magic ticket yet that says, ‘This is what you do.’”

     In April 2023, Fresno Unified, the Fresno County superintendent of schools, Central Unified, Clovis Unified, Sanger Unified, the Fresno Police Department and the city of Fresno launched Street Smart, a joint pedestrian safety campaign. 

    “They all wanted to get the message out and, hopefully, have a stronger impact on the community,” Idsvoog said. “But we know there’s more that has to be done.” 

    ‘It’s not enough’ 

    Despite the multi-agency campaign and other efforts, the number of incidents involving students or pedestrians being hit by vehicles on or near campus has remained stagnant in some districts.

    Central Unified, a district in Fresno that participated in the Street Smart campaign, reported one incident this school year of someone being hit while crossing the street near a school — a number that has not changed from the previous school year.

    The district has continually invested in crossing guards, monitored signage and crosswalk painting needs and advocated for infrastructure improvements, including a High-intensity Activated crossWalK (HAWK) grant near Herndon-Barstow Elementary, a four-way stop near Teague Elementary and additional sidewalks, according to a district spokesperson. 

    So far this school year, between August and Jan. 9, Clovis Unified has recorded 18 incidents of a vehicle striking a pedestrian or bicyclist in contrast to eight incidents last school year. No injuries were reported either year, said district spokesperson Kelly Avants.

    Still, the district continues to focus on pedestrian safety, Avants said, citing crossing guards at busy intersections, reminders to families to follow traffic laws and education of students and the community. 

    Fresno Unified also “isn’t there yet,” Idsvoog said about numbers continuing to rise year after year. As of Friday, the number of students hit as they traveled to or from school stood at 17 — already matching the total at the end of the last school year. 

    In the spring 2023 semester, Fresno Unified launched an age-appropriate pedestrian safety curriculum, which is available again this school year. The school district even sought additional volunteer crossing guards and conducted community outreach about pedestrian safety. 

    Idsvoog said that Fresno Unified’s education and outreach efforts to address pedestrian safety are not “enough to resolve the problem.” 

    “Everything we’re intending to do is still not enough,” she said. “It’s not enough because we’re not seeing a decrease in incidents.” 

    Safe Routes to School initiative

    The Safe Routes to School initiative pilot is assessing 15 schools in Fresno Unified, representing the seven high school regions: 

    • Bullard High 
    • Hoover High 
    • McLane High 
    • Roosevelt High 
    • Duncan High 
    • Cooper Middle
    • Computech Middle 
    • Kings Canyon Middle
    • Scandinavian Middle 
    • Tioga Middle 
    • Wawona K-8
    • Herrera Elementary 
    • Lincoln Elementary 
    • Roeding Elementary 
    • Vang Pao Elementary 

    Also a part of the Safe Routes to School initiative are community meetings.

    The next meetings will be at the Roosevelt High School cafeteria on Jan. 18 and at the Bullard High cafeteria on Jan. 22. The meetings run from 5:30 to 6:30 pm. 

    That’s why the district started the Safe Routes to School initiative this school year. 

    Through a pilot at some of the district’s schools, Toole Design — a company that assesses city infrastructure, develops pedestrian safety programs and improves school arrival and dismissal —  is assessing students’ routes to school.

    The assessments will help Fresno Unified find school and district practices to create safe routes to school for all students, whether they are using a scooter, walking, biking or being dropped off, Idsvoog said.

    Identifying the routes that students use to travel to and from school each day will allow the district to evaluate whether changes should be made. 

    In choosing the piloted campuses, the district considered whether students had been hit there, whether bus accidents had occurred and the proximity to another school. Idsvoog said the district hopes to assess 15 more schools next year through grant funding.

    The assessments will also determine how the city might be able to help the district. 

    For example, Herrera Elementary, Fresno Unified’s newest school, between Storey Elementary and Terronez Middle, has no curbs or sidewalks on one side of the school. 

    Besides creating safe routes for students, the assessments can lead to district events continuing the community’s education on the importance of pedestrian safety. 

    Such events, Idsvoog said, could help reduce incidents and extend dialogue and awareness. 

    What FUSD can learn from other districts that implemented initiative

    San Juan Unified, a 40,000-student district with 64 K-12 schools, implemented the Safe Routes to School initiative to address pedestrian safety. Located in Sacramento County, San Juan Unified comprises incorporated cities as well as communities such as Citrus Heights and Orangevale.

    In partnership with the nonprofit organization Civic Thread, the district developed classroom presentations, demonstrations and other activities on pedestrian safety, according to Natalee Dyudyuk, community safety specialist and Safe Routes to School coordinator in San Juan Unified. 

    The demonstrations encompass a pretend intersection with stop signs, traffic lights and crosswalks; student volunteers act out what happens when “safe crossing skills” learned in the presentation are used or not, Dyudyuk said. 

    Following the demonstration, groups visit a crosswalk near the school to practice their skills, she said. 

    “As I always like to mention to the students, the drivers on the street are not paid actors,” Dyudyuk said about the effectiveness of the real-world scenario. “They are folks who are driving throughout the community, trying to get from point A to point B. It’s a great way to practice because you don’t ever quite know how those drivers are going to react to our presence there.” 

    For its educational activities, the school district hosts bicycle rodeos, helmet giveaways and walk- or bike-to-school days, with students forming a “walking bus” or a “bike train,” Dyudyuk said. 

    “Parents get really excited about that,” she said. 

    According to Raj Rai, San Juan Unified district communication director, pedestrian safety efforts date back to at least 2010. District investments have grown from one liaison working with law enforcement to a safe schools department with eight community safety specialists. 

    In her role since 2021, Dyudyuk works with schools to evaluate student pickup and dropoff and to create checklists and visuals for families to use — education and outreach that continues beyond the initial Safe Routes to School assessments.

    Universities implement education, enforcement 

    Just as K-12 school districts locally and nationally have worked to address pedestrian safety, so have higher education institutions. 

    Each semester, Cal Poly Humboldt in Arcata displays signs “warning and reminding” pedestrians and bicyclists to stop at intersections and others to obey traffic laws, said Peter Cress, a lieutenant with the university’s police department.

    When education and warnings don’t work, the university’s police can turn to enforcement: ticketing drivers. Crediting the college’s approach of using education and enforcement, Cress said that the 5,700-student Cal Poly Humboldt averages one vehicle-pedestrian incident causing significant injury annually. In September, a student was hit while crossing the street.

    Enforcement — or the threat of enforcement — is the only proven way to change motorists’ behavior, Cress said. So, even though education is imperative to what schools do to address pedestrian safety, Cress encourages K-12 districts to implement enforcement through citations, possibly by partnering with local law enforcement. 

    That kind of enforcement isn’t an easy feat for K-12 school systems. 

    Idsvoog said that while the Fresno Police Department has worked to place more patrol officers at schools during student arrival and dismissal, police cannot be at Fresno Unified’s 107 schools every day at the same time while patrolling other parts of the city. 

    One way to fill the void and help with enforcement, Idsvoog said, is using volunteer crossing guards. With more crossing guards, Fresno Unified can strengthen pedestrian safety, she said. 

    But there’s never enough crossing guards, Idsvoog said, and the district usually relies on teachers for that role at schools’ multiple crosswalks used by students. 

    Kimberly Armstrong, second grade teacher at Kirk Elementary, became a volunteer crossing guard out of concern for her students. As a crossing guard, she said she still witnesses people disregarding traffic laws. 

    “There’s really no consequences for them to do any better,” Armstrong said during the Dec. 12 Safe Routes to School community meeting at Computech Middle School. She implored district leaders to find a way to add police at school arrival and dismissal, even if they have to rotate between schools or regions. 

    Fresno Unified school officials can report areas where high numbers of pedestrian safety concerns are occurring to police, Idsvoog said, but problems exist at each of the district’s more than 100 campuses. 

    “Having a police officer there is not just the answer,” Idsvoog said. “There is no quick resolution. There’s got to be a bigger plan: more education, more messaging to parents, yes, consequences.”

    ‘Everyone’s responsibility’

    While law enforcement can define social expectations and attitudes toward pedestrian safety on a higher ed campus, the school community of parents, school staff and community members can set the standard in a K-12 environment, Lt. Cress said. 

    When parents and community members witness or learn about pedestrian safety concerns, Cress said, they must have difficult conversations with each other, which will lead to “conversation after conversation after conversation.” 

    “Those types of informal conversations generate a community attitude,” he said. 

    Ensuring pedestrian safety

    “There’s so many things that we all can do,” Idsvoog said, including: 

    • Adhering to speed limits, crosswalks and traffics signs, including the stop signs that are deployed from school buses
    • Being aware of  one’s surroundings
    • Having conversations with students 

    District leaders and school staff in the Fresno, Clovis, Central and San Juan districts agreed that student and pedestrian safety is a community effort that requires everyone’s effort — not just parents and students. 

    “Pedestrian safety is everyone’s responsibility,” Idsvoog said. “And it’s going to take parents, community members and even students to really make a difference.” 

    Armstrong, the teacher and volunteer crossing guard, said she is optimistic about the district’s efforts, but “time is of the essence” to improve pedestrian safety. The importance of students arriving at and leaving campus safely is often overlooked and missing from the conversation about school safety, she said. 

    “We can’t just worry about kids and their safety once they’re inside of our school buildings,” Armstrong said. “We have to ensure their safety getting to and from. It’s just as important.”





    Source link

  • University of California enrolled a record number of California residents in the fall

    University of California enrolled a record number of California residents in the fall


    Student walk up and down the Promenade to Shields Library at UC Davis.

    Credit: Gregory Urquiaga / UC Davis

    The University of California increased enrollment of in-state students by more than 4,000 this past fall, keeping with demands from lawmakers and Gov. Gavin Newsom to grow the number of California residents who get a coveted spot at the university system. 

    Not only did UC enroll a record number of Californians and its largest-ever class of California first-year students, but the rate of increase for those students was higher than in recent years, when UC has often seen only modest growth.

    That freshman class had 42,058 Californians — or 2,094 more than the previous fall. In addition to the uptick in first-years, UC enrolled more returning in-state sophomores, juniors and seniors than the previous year. Overall, UC enrolled 194,571 California resident undergraduates — or 4,145 more than fall 2022, a 2.2% jump. That accounted for 83.4% of UC’s total undergraduate enrollment. Enrollment of out-of-state students declined, thanks to a drop in the number of returning international students. 

    The historic jump in California residents is a turnaround from last year when lawmakers were critical of UC for failing to meet their demands.

    Campuses that welcomed an increase in California freshmen last fall are: Santa Cruz, Irvine, Davis, UCLA, San Diego and Santa Barbara. Berkeley and Merced saw only modest increases. When including returning students, the largest increases of California residents happened at the Berkeley, Los Angeles and San Diego campuses. UC officials cited higher retention rates as being among the main drivers of those increases. 

    “When we take a look at California resident students, this is the largest number that we’ve ever had,” Pamela Brown, UC’s vice president of institutional research and academic planning, said on a call with reporters this week.

    Over the last several years, UC has faced pressure from lawmakers and Newsom to prioritize enrollment of California resident undergraduates. In 2022, Newsom implemented a multiyear agreement — or a “compact” — with the system. Under the agreement, Newsom pledged annual budget increases of 5% in exchange for increased enrollment of in-state students, among other things.

    The system at times has struggled to keep up with those requests, with higher numbers of admitted California residents not always translating to enrollments in recent years.

    UC officials maintain they are committed to continue growing enrollment of California residents, even though Newsom earlier this month proposed deferring $258.8 million in state dollars for UC until 2025. That includes the funding for a 5% increase to UC’s base budget that the system is supposed to receive as part of the compact. 

    “We’re all in on the compact,” Brown said. 

    UC also enrolled a more racially diverse student body this past fall. Across the undergraduate student body, the share of students from underrepresented racial groups — including Black, Latino, Native American and Pacific Islander students — grew by 1.1% or 3,481 students. By far, the largest increase was among Latino students. UC enrolled 61,075 Latino students, 2,671 more than the previous fall, with California residents making up the vast majority of those students.

    UC achieved the increases despite a small decline in California residents transferring from a California community college, with the number of first-time transfer students down by 72. That decline, however, was much more modest than the previous year, when the number of in-state residents who transferred from a California community college declined by more than 1,000 students.

    Officials have attributed the drop in transfer students to declines in the number of students attending community colleges, which suffered massive enrollment losses during the pandemic. But with enrollment at the state’s community colleges now showing signs of recovery, those trends could be reversing.

    “We feel that this is something that is going to continue to improve in the next few years,” Brown said.

    UC’s optimistic estimates for in-state enrollment marks somewhat of a contrast from just a year ago, when UC told lawmakers it was behind schedule in increasing the enrollment of those students. UC estimated at the time that its enrollment of in-state students would decrease in the 2022-23 academic year, frustrating lawmakers who had asked UC to add thousands of California residents.

    In fact, though, UC ended up increasing enrollment of California residents on a full-time equivalent basis by more than 1,500 students in 2022-23, officials said this week. That was because students took more classes in the spring and winter than UC had anticipated. 

    The full-time equivalent calculation is different from headcount enrollment, which is a simple count of the total number of students. The number of full-time equivalent students, which is how the state calculates enrollment for funding purposes, is based on the total number of credits that students take. Under the multi-year agreement with Newsom, UC is expected to have added 8,000 full-time equivalent resident undergraduates by 2026-27, with 2022-23 serving as the baseline.

    UC won’t know its 2023-24 full-time equivalent enrollment numbers until the end of the academic year, but the increase in headcount enrollment in fall 2023 suggests that number is continuing to trend upward. 

    And even though UC is funded based on its full-time equivalent enrollment, lawmakers are just as concerned with ensuring the system continues to increase the total number of residents who attend. 

    The university’s plans for sustained enrollment growth does raise the question of whether its campuses have the capacity for that growth, particularly with some campuses already facing housing shortages.

    During this week’s call with reporters, officials cited new housing projects that are underway at several campuses and noted that future new students may not all be attending UC’s traditional brick-and-mortar campuses.

    “We are evaluating opportunities for students to pursue their degrees through things like our University of California in DC program, through our Sacramento program, which may not have direct footprints on campuses, but still allow them to have the in-person educational experience,” said Ryan King, a spokesperson for the system. 

    King added that UC will also look to increase online offerings.

    Brown also noted that the compact with Newsom has provided the “stability of knowing what we’re getting” and will help support enrollment growth.

    This year, under Newsom’s proposed budget deferrals, UC would be asked to borrow money to cover its compact funding — $227.8 million, plus another $31 million to increase resident enrollment and offset declines in the enrollment of nonresidents, who pay more tuition.

    In his budget proposal, Newsom said UC would get reimbursed in next year’s state budget. In its analysis of Newsom’s budget, the Legislative Analyst’s Office warned that plan could be risky. 

    “Not only would this proposal increase the pressure on the state to provide these payments next year—despite continued deficits — but it also would shift fiscal risk to these entities in the event the state does not ultimately make these payments,” the LAO wrote. 

    Brown, though, said UC remains confident in the compact and noted campuses are already moving forward with their 2024-25 enrollment planning, when UC expects to further increase California resident enrollment.

    “Campuses have set out targets that are helping us achieve the compact goals, and we’re continuing with those,” Brown said. “All our enrollment planning functions are looking to achieve the compact goals, and we are expressing great confidence that we’ll continue to get that support from the state.”





    Source link

  • Trump is Incoherent on ICE Raids of Farm Workers


    Last week, ICE was rounding up immigrant workers in agriculture, swooping them up in the fields where they were picking berries and radishes, trimming the vines in vineyards, and preparing the soil for planting. This is backbreaking work. The videos I’ve seen were taken in California, so this must be part of Trump’s focus on crippling the big Blue state.

    The slogan of the farm workers’ union, United Farmworkers, is “We feed you.” If they are all detained and deported, who will do the hard work they do?

    Farmers in California are typically pro-Trump; some of them must have called Trump to plead that he stop arresting their loyal workers. That would explain why, on Friday, Trump directed ICE to stop arresting agricultural workers, as well as immigrants employed in hotels and the restaurant industry.

    Trump heard them and posted this incoherent response on Truth Social:

    “Our great Farmers and people in the Hotel and Leisure business have been stating that our very aggressive policy on immigration is taking very good, long time workers away from them, with those jobs being almost impossible to replace. In many cases the Criminals allowed into our Country by the VERY Stupid Biden Open Borders Policy are applying for those jobs. This is not good. We must protect our Farmers, but get the CRIMINALS OUT OF THE USA. Changes are coming!”

    Does Trump really believe criminals are slipping across the border to take jobs as farm workers?

    Maybe Trump could launch a campaign to persuade MAGA patriots to pick the crops, not only in California but in Florida, Texas, the Deep South, Midwest and other states that voted for him. How many applicants would he get?



    Source link

  • Cal State faculty staging historic systemwide, weeklong strike

    Cal State faculty staging historic systemwide, weeklong strike


    California State University faculty members protest for better salary and working conditions in Sacramento.

    Ashley A. Smith/EdSource

    For the first time ever, faculty across the entire California State University system on Monday is staging a weeklong labor strike. 

    The more than 29,000 faculty members in the nation’s largest public university system continue to demand higher wages and for the administration to return to the bargaining table. 

    For many of Cal State’s nearly 450,000 students, it means missing their first, second or third week of classes this semester or quarter as professors and instructors walk the picket lines across the system’s 23 campuses. 

    Kate Ozment, an English professor at Cal Poly Pomona, said she hasn’t met her students yet, with the first week of spring classes coinciding with the weeklong strike. Ozment said she posted a notice to her students through the Canvas online learning management system about the strike. 

    “My goal is to not create confusion with students and my goal is to not harm students,” she said. “I don’t want them on campus because with an empty campus, we win. I sent them information about why we’re striking and that I was participating and I also gave them an overview of the course schedule so they could see how I accommodate the work stoppage.” 

    Ozment said she won’t be grading, collecting assignments or leading instruction. But she has encouraged her students to work independently this week. 

    Arabel Meyer, a journalism senior at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, said all three of her instructors this quarter notified her that they will be striking this week and that classes have been canceled. On the quarter system, students at Cal Poly SLO are in their third week of classes. 

    “I support the faculty in their striking,” Meyer said, adding that as a college student who can barely afford rent in San Luis Obispo, she understands how difficult it is for a professor making the minimum salary to afford rent in the city. “I can’t even imagine being a college professor and living in the town that I live in and not being paid a wage that is enough to be able to survive and be able to provide for their families.” 

    Meyer said she’s not worried about a week away from classes hurting her academically, and she’s heard other students celebrate the idea of a “week off.” The real difficulty will be for the professors to “reorganize their schedules and make sure that they’re covering the material that they need to get through in a quarter,” she said. 

    Nicolette Parra, a political science junior at CSU Northridge, who transferred to university from community college, said she supports the faculty after noticing the problems in CSU.

    “There’s a sense of greediness, like the administration just wants more money,” she said. “I am concerned about canceled classes because when the strikes are happening is supposed to be our first week back from winter break. It feels like we are behind. It’s not the professors’ fault, it’s the administration and that worries me.”

    Salary and wages remain the top issue dividing the faculty and the administration. The faculty have argued for a 12% general salary increase for this year. 

    CSU FAculty demands
    • 12% pay raises to stay ahead of inflation.
    • Pay equity and raising the floor for lowest-paid faculty.
    • Manageable workloads that allow for more support and engagement with students.
    • More counselors to improve students’ much-needed access to mental health services.
    • Expanding paid parental leave to a full semester.
    • Accessible lactation and milk storage spaces for lactating faculty.
    • Safe gender-inclusive restrooms and changing rooms.
    • Safety provisions for faculty interacting with university police on campuses.

    Cal State Chancellor Mildred Garcia said that, without question, the faculty deserve a pay increase.

    “We are committed to compensating employees fairly, but we are and must be equally committed to the long-term stability and success of the CSU,” Garcia said on Friday during a meeting with reporters. “As a new chancellor four months on the job, I have no interest in a strike. We are ready and willing to come back to the bargaining table with the California Faculty Association, but we must work within our financial realities.”

    Garcia said despite the strike, Cal State campuses will remain open this week and provide guidance to students and families and updates about the status of classes.

    “The CSU is not canceling classes,” said Christina Checel, CSU’s vice chancellor for labor and employee relations. “Individual faculty members who decide to strike will cancel their own classes. So students should check their class portals or contact their professors to find out whether they intend to hold class.”

    Checel said the universities have made contingency plans to continue providing advising, financial aid and other services to students, but the strike “will not interfere with students’ ability to complete their courses or graduate on time.”

    Earlier this month, the CSU administration walked away from the bargaining table with the faculty union and offered a 5% pay raise starting Jan. 31. The administration said the salary increase is consistent with agreements CSU reached with five other unions. Over the weekend, CSU also reached an agreement with its skilled trades union, which represents about 1,100 employees.

    Faculty say they are insulted by the 5% wage increase.

    “Somebody can decide to stop having a conversation with you, but that doesn’t mean the conversation is over,” Ozment said. “They unilaterally decided what was appropriate for us. It was not done in collaboration, it was not done in conversation and it was not done based on any reasonable math from our perspective. What we’re hoping is that this (strike) brings them back to the table. They made a bad choice. They can unmake it.” 

    A 5% pay raise would have no impact on professors’ ability to make a living when campuses are raising other costs on them, faculty said. Kevin Weir, a Sacramento State professor on the faculty union’s bargaining team, said campuses are raising parking costs, which wipes out any benefits of a 5% increase for those instructors that are already struggling with the cost of living. 

    But meeting the faculty union’s demands would cost the system about $380 million in the first year and every year thereafter, an amount the system can’t currently afford, said Leora Freedman, CSU’s vice chancellor for human resources.

    “The CSU currently spends 75% of its operating budget on compensation,” Freedman said. “If we were to agree to the increases that these unions are demanding, we would have to make severe cuts to programs. We would have to lay off employees. This would jeopardize our educational mission and cause hardship to many employees.”

    Freedman said CSU has made several proposals to the faculty union, but the organization has not been willing to reduce its economic demands.

    “As soon as either union demonstrates that they’re ready to make meaningful movement in bargaining, we will be back at the table,” she said.

    Weir said he disagrees with the university system’s financial arguments. In October, the union released its own independent study conducted by an Eastern Michigan University professor that examined Cal State’s cash flows and reserves. That study, which CSU has described as incorrect, concluded that CSU has about $8.2 billion in reserves and cash investments.

    “They have more money coming in than going out every year,” Weir said. “They have enough money to give this chancellor 30% more than her predecessor, and her predecessor got 30% more than her predecessor. They have given campus presidents up to 29% increases. They have no problem rewarding the senior executives of the system, but they do have a problem paying faculty just to keep up with inflation. So, no, I don’t buy their argument.” 

    Much of the wage dispute comes as CSU has granted salary increases to campus presidents and hired the new system chancellor with a nearly $800,000 base salary, even as the system faced a budget deficit. 

    Steve Relyea, CSU’s vice chancellor and chief financial officer, said the faculty union has misrepresented the university system’s financial situation. Much of the $8 billion the faculty have cited as available for salaries can’t be used for salaries because it is already committed to CSU’s debt obligations, capital projects, and other contractual commitments like financial aid, housing and parking, he said.

    “To use those one-time dollars for ongoing commitments would be reckless and put the institution and our students at risk,” Relyea said.

    Even if an agreement is reached between the faculty union and the CSU, negotiations for the next faculty contract are expected to start this spring. Weir said union membership will begin receiving surveys to submit their ideas and thoughts on what changes and demands need to be made in the next contract. Weir said it wouldn’t be the first time that the union and the university system negotiated on two separate contracts simultaneously, with the last time occurring in 2011. 

    “But I would rather not do that,” he said. “I would rather settle this contract and then move on to the successor contract. I would love to get back into the classroom and be done with negotiations for a while. But in order for that to happen, I need a willing negotiation partner and, so far, management is walking away from the table and indicating they’re not willing.” 

    Faculty and students have indicated and are aware that if the salary disagreement between CSU and the union isn’t solved, there may be future strikes. 

    “My students are still facing rising tuition and my peers are still driving for Uber and going to local food banks,” Ozment said. “I think that people should anticipate bigger and longer strike actions if we don’t actually get what we need to run this system because we have it. They have the money. They’re just choosing to hoard it like little dragons from ‘Lord of the Rings.’ ”

    California Student Journalism Corps member Delilah Brumer, who is a student at Pierce College in L.A., contributed to this report. Arabel Meyer, a source in this story, is also a member of the California Student Journalism Corps.





    Source link

  • Schools should not be battlegrounds for immigration enforcement

    Schools should not be battlegrounds for immigration enforcement


    It’s graduation week in Los Angeles — a time that should be filled with joy and celebration for students and their families. Instead, fear and uncertainty have taken hold in many of our communities.

    Since June 6, federal agents have been conducting extensive raids across Los Angeles, targeting areas many of our students call home. In response, some of our schools mobilized community volunteers or were forced to offer virtual graduation options because families were too afraid to attend in person.

    These actions have shattered the sense of safety that schools work so hard to build. These raids and subsequent arrests have sparked protests.

    I recently stood with staff, students, teachers and parents in Sacramento, urging legislators to pass legislation that would boost protections for immigrant communities.

    Among the group was an undocumented mother of two U.S.-born students who spoke about the emotional changes she has seen recently in her 10-year-old son. “My kids are scared that something might happen during drop-off or pickup, or that immigration officers will try to come into their schools,” she said. “Schools are supposed to be their second homes — places where kids grow, learn and feel safe. But when immigration officials show up like this, it is hard to feel that way.”

    Her son now suffers from panic attacks, clinging to his mother after school, terrified she won’t come home. In response, his mother has done everything she can to protect her children, from seeking therapy for her son, to traveling to Sacramento with the Partnership for Los Angeles Schools (a nonprofit that manages 20 LAUSD schools in historically under-resourced communities) to advocating for stronger protections against recent immigration enforcement. “I am afraid, too, but I do not show it,” she said.

    This family’s feelings reflect broader experiences across Los Angeles Unified — not just for undocumented families, but also for U.S.-born students and American citizens who are feeling the ripple effects of these raids. This past April, authorities were denied entry into two elementary schools after they showed up unannounced and sought to get in touch with students who allegedly entered the country without documentation.

    “I’m still mystified as to how a first-, second-, third-, fourth- or sixth-grader would pose any type of risk to the national security of our nation,” said LAUSD Superintendent Alberto Carvalho, who was an undocumented immigrant as a teenager from Portugal.

    There are an estimated 133,000 undocumented students enrolled in California, and roughly 1 million live with a parent or caregiver who is undocumented. This will not be the last time we hear a story about agents attempting to enter schools.

    Without clear laws and protections, there will be more stories of schools being invaded, more confusion, more fear, and more trauma.

    No family should have to live in fear like this. In 1982, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that states cannot constitutionally deny a free and public education to undocumented students. Families are trying to exercise that right.

    Today, the Partnership for Los Angeles Schools and its partners are urging lawmakers to protect young people when they go to school by not allowing immigration enforcement to be left to the discretion of individual ICE agents. Such actions should be authorized in writing by a judge. Further, when student safety is in doubt, students and their families should have the right to be forewarned and be given the freedom to stay home without schools being punished with funding cuts.

    These common-sense measures would help ensure that schools continue to be what they were always meant to be: institutions of learning. When students are scared, they cannot learn. When families fear being torn apart, they are reluctant to engage with educators. And when the government sends agents to schools, trust is broken.

    Many states and districts have issued new or updated guidance this year, building on pledges they made to be “safe zones” for immigrant communities during Trump’s first term. Several have published guidance about how schools can comply with federal and state laws and respond to the presence of ICE on campuses and what type of student and parental information can be shared.

    LAUSD has continued to be a leader in California and nationwide. In addition, the district board has passed resolutions stating that LAUSD will be an “immigrant sanctuary.” The state has prepared guidance to help school districts comply with state law limiting participation in immigration enforcement activities.

    But much more will be needed if we are to keep students and their families safe in an increasingly hostile environment. Join us in urging state lawmakers to support several immigration-relsted, including AB 49, which passed the Assembly last month and will be voted on by the Senate Education Committee on June 18.

    •••

    Guadalupe Guerrero is CEO of the Partnership for Los Angeles Schools, a nonprofit that manages 20 LAUSD schools in historically under-resourced communities.

    The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.





    Source link

  • LAUSD agrees to fund $900 million to settle sexual assault lawsuits

    LAUSD agrees to fund $900 million to settle sexual assault lawsuits


    The Los Angeles Unified school board did not discuss the bonds for settling sexual assault lawsuits before members authorized them on June 3.

    Source: Livestream recordings of Los Angeles Unified board meetings

    Top Takeaways
    • School trustees authorize bonds without comment or public explanation.
    • Lawmakers were warned of the financial impact of erasing the statute of limitations.
    • Other districts also face massive costs in response to a 2019 state law.

    The Los Angeles Unified School District board has quietly approved borrowing nearly $900 million — including interest — to settle decades-old sexual assault cases involving former students. 

    And that will likely not be enough to settle all the claims the nation’s second-largest school district is facing under 2019 legislation that allows victims of abuse by school employees to seek damages for incidents dating back to the 1970s. District spokesperson Britt Vaughan would not say how many claims the district faces, the number that have been settled and what they have cost to date.

    Board members approved the expenditure on June 3 without comment, agreeing to borrow up to $500 million through judgment obligation bonds with an estimated 6.10% interest rate, documents show. Unlike bonds for school construction, they did not require voter approval. The debt is due to be paid off in 15 years. The claims are not covered by insurance carriers. 

    This fiscal year, the district’s undisclosed number of settlement claims was roughly $302 million, Vaughan said.

    “The board has been talking about judgment obligation bonds for, I would say, about a year and a half,” board member Tanya Ortiz Franklin said in an interview. Spreading out the payments means “the district’s current students aren’t punished by depleting resources,” she said.

    No public hearings were held. Board members were briefed about the matter in small groups, she said. “We also had several conversations in closed sessions, as we typically do with legal cases.” She did not disclose the number of claims made against the district or how many were settled.

    The district administration will likely ask the board to approve more borrowing next year to settle additional claims, Ortiz Franklin said. 

    The district is far from alone in facing massive payouts to victims who have filed claims under the legislation, Assembly Bill 218, which experts say is impacting local public agencies throughout the state.

    Los Angeles County alone is facing $4 billion in settlements involving formerly incarcerated juveniles and foster youth.

    By taking on long-term debt to deal with the AB 218 cases, LAUSD is “lessening any potential impacts to (its) core education programs in the near term,” by spreading out the settlement costs, supporting documents provided to board members stated. Nonetheless, the cost of paying down the bonds will reduce spending on students from the district’s general fund by tens of millions of dollars annually for the 15 years after the bond is issued. 

    AB 218, brought by then-Assemblymember Lorena Gonzalez, rolled back the statute of limitations for abuse claims involving public employees like teachers to “22 years from the date the plaintiff” becomes an adult “or within 5 years of the date the plaintiff discovers or reasonably should have discovered that the psychological injury or illness occurring after” reaching adulthood was caused by sexual assault. Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the bill on Oct. 13, 2019.

    Messages left at Gonzalez’s office were not returned. 

    Legislative records show that proponents of AB 218 argued that sexual assault scandals involving the Catholic Church and the Boy Scouts showed that victims of child sexual abuse sometimes took years to come forward, often after the statute of limitations to seek damages had expired. 

    “Victims who are ready to come forward today deserve an opportunity to expose their perpetrators and those who covered up the abuse,” members of the Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit Victim Policy Institute told lawmakers, records show.

    Opponents of the bill, including the California Association of School Business Officials and other groups, expressed concerns about cost.

    “It will be impossible for employers to effectively defend against these claims when evidence is likely gone, witnesses have moved or passed away, and there has been a turnover of staff,” a summary of opponents’ concerns in legislative archives stated. “With these barriers, schools will be unable to adequately respond to these claims. This failure will result in diversion of funding intended to educate students and serve communities to financing increased legal costs, whether or not the claim is valid.”

    A Senate staff analysis warned of “unknown, potentially major out-year costs to local entities and school districts to the extent litigation is successfully brought outside the current statute of limitations and/or the entities are liable for damages.”  The bill was unanimously passed by both the Senate and the Assembly.

    Last week, in an interview, an advocate for taxpayers was critical of the debts the legislation created for school districts and other agencies. 

    “These bonds are going to hang around the necks of school districts for decades,” said Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. “There has to be a statute of limitations,” he said. “Witnesses are probably gone. All cases have to be time-barred at some point. This is bad policy.”

    School districts across the state are facing similar claims allowed by AB 218 and facing crises of how to pay for settlements, according to a January report by the state Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team, or FCMAT. As the matter evolves, there is no firm number of the number of claims so far brought against districts, “but the best estimate is $2 billion to $3 billion.” 

    “A comprehensive analysis of claims is not available,” the report states. “But what we can conclude is that the impact is significant.” 

    FCMAT concluded that “the goal should be to completely eliminate childhood sexual assault in public schools” and to “increase mandated training to build awareness of, and reporting options for, childhood sexual assault.”

    Other recommendations, such as creating a victim compensation fund to eliminate claims brought against individual public agencies, have received little support in the Legislature and were opposed by plaintiffs’ attorneys, the FCMAT’s chief executive officer, Michael Fine, said in an interview.

    The claims and settlements, Fine said, continue to pile up. “The data changes daily.”





    Source link

  • Cal State System reaches tentative agreement with faculty on salary

    Cal State System reaches tentative agreement with faculty on salary


    California Faculty Association.

    California Faculty Association

    Faculty in the nation’s largest public university system agreed to end their historic strike against the California State University system late Monday evening.

    The faculty union, which represents more than 29,000 professors, lecturers, librarians and coaches, agreed to a 5% general salary increase retroactive to July 1, 2023, and a 5% general salary increase on July 1, 2024, as long as the state does not reduce Cal State’s base funding this summer.

    Monday marked the first day of a planned one-week strike. The system’s nearly 450,000 students saw many of their classes canceled as faculty protested. However, the new agreement means all faculty will return to campuses and their classes on Tuesday.

    “The collective action of so many lecturers, professors, counselors, librarians and coaches over these last eight months forced CSU management to take our demands seriously,” said Charles Toombs, president of the California Faculty Association, the union. “This tentative agreement makes major gains for all faculty at the CSU.”

    The agreement would raise the salary floor for the lowest paid faculty by increasing minimum pay by about $3,000 retroactive to July 1 and raising it again by $3,000 this summer. It also expands paid parental leave from six to 10 weeks.

    Other highlights from the agreement include improved access to gender-inclusive restrooms and lactation spaces, increased protection for faculty who have negative interactions with campus police officers, and additional support for lecturers.

    The agreement extends the current contract for 2022-24 one year to June 30, 2025.

    “I am extremely pleased and deeply appreciative that we have reached common ground with CFA that will end the strike immediately,” CSU Chancellor Mildred García said. “The agreement enables the CSU to fairly compensate its valued, world-class faculty while protecting the university system’s long-term financial sustainability. With the agreement in place, I look forward to advancing our student-centered work — together — as the nation’s greatest driver of social mobility and the pipeline fueling California’s diverse and educated workforce.” 

    The university system is encouraging students to look for messages from their instructors about adjusting their classes this week. Faculty will vote to ratify the new agreement in the coming weeks.

    “This historic agreement was won because of members’ solidarity, collective action, bravery, and love for each other and our students,” said Antonio Gallo, an instructor on the Northridge campus. “This is what People Power looks like. This deal immensely improves working conditions for faculty and strengthens learning conditions for students.”

    The agreement marks another victory for education laborers, the union said, especially following similar strikes at the University of California and the University of Southern California.





    Source link

  • Let’s carefully think about how we use AI in education

    Let’s carefully think about how we use AI in education


    Credit: Sanket Mishra / Pexels

    Could you navigate the roads without GPS? What about writing an essay error-free? Could you complete that task without spell check? Although many media reports describe artificial intelligence (AI) as a new innovation, it has been around for decades. GPS and spell check are just two examples of how AI is an integral part of the technologies we use on a daily basis.

    However, the introduction of ChatGPT shook the world. Possibilities for using generative AI to create content and deliver innovations in many fields and aspects of modern life are being developed and introduced quickly, and they are dramatically changing the way we use information. This is especially true in education.

    Students are using AI to complete assignments, teachers are using it to develop lesson plans, and schools are using it to provide individualized support to children. However, there is a lack of clear guidance on the use of AI, which could create new challenges far beyond concerns about cheating, plagiarism and data privacy. 

    One concern is what we refer to as digital amnesia. People tend to forget information that is easily obtained through search engines. Typically, people search for the same word, concept or fact several times, because for many, the brain does not register the information. This dilemma is known as the “Google effect,” and research shows that this often has a negative impact on one’s ability to retain critical information. 

    AI could amplify the amnesia of knowledge and skills on a new level. When an artificial intelligence tool is used to complete homework, the knowledge and skills that would have been developed by completing those activities are no longer acquired. Similarly, when AI is used to make problem-solving decisions, the development of critical cognitive skills and intellectual creativity may be put at risk. 

    The availability of a wide range of AI tools is also raising fundamental questions about what should be taught and emphasized in schools. When calculators were adopted, certain tasks, such as the multiplication and division of large numbers, could be completed efficiently to save time for developing other skills. However, it is still important for students to learn essential arithmetic skills because we know it is foundational to learning more complex math.  

    For this reason, policymakers and educators must know how the use of AI will affect long-term learning outcomes before it is utilized in the classroom. Without carefully thinking through the consequences of using AI in ways that short-circuit learning, it could produce adverse educational effects that we are presently unable to envision, and it could exacerbate existing inequities. 

    Responsible integration of AI requires creating opportunities for users to actively engage in learning activities. AI tools can be used to promote creative thinking and problem-solving skills, giving users learning opportunities that deepen engagement and empower them.   

    We recently documented the possibility of using AI in this way. Through an AI-supported professional development program, we asked math teachers to complete an activity related to their daily teaching tasks and then used an AI tool to analyze their work. The tool identified areas where teachers needed additional support and provided them with activities to acquire the skills needed by asking targeted questions. Teachers learned by doing rather than by simply using AI to show them how to do it. This approach not only improved teachers’ knowledge and skills, it also improved their students’ performance. 

    This research showed that AI can be used as a teacher’s aide. It can analyze students’ work and identify which students need additional help. It can also suggest evidence-based strategies teachers can use to modify subsequent instruction to meet students’ needs. 

    As AI tools become more widely available, it is essential that state and district leaders pay close attention to what vendors are selling. Will new AI tools enhance and empower teachers and learners, or will they contribute to passivity? To answer this important question, teachers must be given an opportunity to investigate how these tools will be used to support students before decisions are made. 

    The second major concern is that teachers and students may begin to over rely on the information provided by AI. Generative AI is based on the data it is trained to assimilate and distill. As we now know, AI makes mistakes that only a well-trained user can identify. The rubrics and data used in AI tools to grade student work, provide guidance on how to address gaps in learning, or to improve student skills, may not be adequate. It could easily reproduce biases and inequities that exist in our schools and society. 

    To avoid these potential problems, content experts from diverse backgrounds must be involved in the development of AI tools in education. These tools must be vetted carefully by subject matter and pedagogical experts who can provide feedback before they are introduced into classrooms. No AI tool should be used unless protocols for data privacy are well documented and there is real evidence that it will improve teaching and learning 

    We are not wary or opposed to using AI to enhance learning. In fact, we believe it has tremendous potential to support teachers and empower learners if used correctly. However, policymakers and educators must ask the right questions about its use and take precautionary steps to determine which tools will be helpful and which may harm teaching and learning. 

    •••

    Yasemin Copur-Gencturk is an associate professor at the University of Southern California’s Rossier School of Education and a leading researcher on AI in education. 

    Pedro Noguera is dean of USC’s Rossier School of Education and a newly appointed member of the U.S. Department of Education’s committee on the use of AI in education.

    The opinions expressed in this piece represent those of the authors. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.





    Source link

  • Trump’s Ignorant Comments about World War II

    Trump’s Ignorant Comments about World War II


    At a news conference, Trump mused about Russia’s role in World War II and our alliance with Russia.

    He began by saying that he just finished talking to President Macron of France, who said the French were celebrating “our victory” in World War II. Trump scoffed.

    Then he said he had a conversation with President Putin. This reminded Trump that the Russians had been our allies in World War II, that they had lost 51 million people fighting the Nazis, and that Putin had fought with them. Yes, Putin himself assured our victory.

    So why, he wondered, does everyone now hate Russia, but love Germany and Japan, who were our enemies?

    “Macron was a good man. I said ‘what are you doing?’ he goes, uh, ‘we’re celebrating World War Two, our victory.’ I said ‘your victory? heh, your victory. tell me about that.’ and then I called somebody else, and I happened to speak to President Putin at the time. now, in all fairness to him, he lost 51 million people, and he did fight. Russia fought. sort of interesting, isn’t it? he fought with us at World War Two, and everybody hates him. and Germany and Japan, they’re fine, you know? someday, somebody will explain that, but I like Germany and Japan, too. but Putin is a little confused by that, you know? he said ‘we lost 51 million people and we were your ally and now everybody hates Russia, and they love Germany and Japan.’ I said ‘let’s explain that some time, ok?’ it’s a, uh, it’s a strange world.”

    Here are a few pointers for Trump:

    Stalin and Hitler signed a friendship pact in 1939 (non-aggression pact). Hitler invaded the USSR in 1941. After Hitler’s attack, the USSR became an ally of the anti-Nazis.

    Stalin was one of the worst dictators in history. But the UK, other European allies, and the U.S. welcomed him into the alliance against the Nazis.

    The Russians had more casualties than any other nation, but not 51 million.

    AI summarized the sources:

    An estimated 27 million Soviet citizens, including both military personnel and civilians, perished during World War II. This figure represents the highest number of casualties for any nation involved in the war. Of these deaths, around 8.7 to 10.7 million were military personnel, while 10.4 to 13.3 million were civilians. The majority of Soviet citizens who died were civilians. 

    So, no, 51 million Russians did not die in WWII.

    Contrary to Trump, Putin did not fight “with us” in World War II. He was born in 1952.

    Why do people hate Russia now–our wartime allies– but love Germany and Japan–iur enemies in World War II?

    Most Americans remember that the U.S. and the USSR parted ways after that war. Stalin continued to rule Russia and satellite nations with an iron fist. He was always a brutal dictator who crushed dissent and murdered enemies and banned criticism and sent poets and playwrights into Siberian work camp.

    When the USSR collapsed in 1991, western nations and Russian democrats hoped that Russian would shed its authoritarian past and join the western world as a free society.

    Meanwhile, Germany and Japan shed their history of fascism and built sturdy democracies (Germany was split in two, with a democratic West Germany and a Soviet-controlled East Germany until the USSR disintegrated in 1991).

    Americans today admire Germany and Japan because they are now stable democracies with thriving economies.

    Most Americans do not like Putin because he is a dictator who has been in power since 2000 (with a brief power when he was the shadow leader), and the Russian parliament has extended his term to 2036.

    Putin disappears his rivals. They are murdered in broad daylight, or mysteriously fall out of buildings, or are poisoned, or–like Alexei Navalny–die of unknown causes in remote prisons. No free press. No free speech. No dissent permitted.

    AI summary of deaths attributed to Stalin:

    Estimates of the number of people who died under Stalin’s rule range from 10 to 30 million, with most historians agreeing on a figure around 20 million. This includes both intentional killings and deaths due to starvation, forced labor, and neglect. 

    Elaboration: 

    • Estimates Vary:Different sources provide varying estimates, reflecting the difficulty in compiling accurate data from the Soviet archives. 
    • Official Records:Declassified Soviet archives revealed official records of executions, Gulag deaths, and deaths related to forced resettlement and deportations, totaling around 3.3 million. 
    • Soviet Famine:The Holodomor, a man-made famine in the 1930s, resulted in the deaths of millions, with estimates ranging from 5.5 to 6.5 million. (Ukraine)
    • “Purposive” vs. Neglect:Historian Stephen Wheatcroft estimates that around 1 million of the deaths were intentional, while the rest resulted from neglect and irresponsibility. 
    • Context Matters:It’s important to remember that Stalin’s policies led to widespread suffering and death, not just through executions but also through starvation, forced labor, and the overall repressive nature of his regime. 

    If Trump liked to read (he doesn’t), I would recommend that he read The Black Book of Communism, written by French historians.

    If others can explain better to Trump why most Americans don’t like Putin, please add your thoughts.



    Source link

  • Newsom’s $8 billion fix to spare cuts to schools, community colleges may face tough sell

    Newsom’s $8 billion fix to spare cuts to schools, community colleges may face tough sell


    Gov. Gavin Newsom announces his 2024-25 state budget proposal, including his plans to deal with a projected deficit in Sacramento on Jan. 10.. Credit: Brontë Wittpenn / San Francisco Chronicle / Polaris

    Gov. Gavin Newsom buoyed the hopes of school district and community college educators this month when, despite a sizable three-year decline in state revenue, he promised to protect schools and colleges from cuts and to uphold future spending commitments.

    They might want to hold their applause until after the last act, when the Legislature passes the 2024-25 budget in June.

    In an analysis of the state budget, the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) cautioned that there are questions about how Newsom plans to close $8 billion of a huge revenue shortfall facing schools and community colleges.

    Beyond meeting this challenge, the LAO also urged legislators to start planning for education spending beyond 2024-25, when flat or declining revenues are expected to raise difficult financial choices. They could pit funding of ongoing expenses against sustaining ambitious programs like summer and after-school programs for low-income students, additional community schools, money for teacher training in early literacy and math, and confronting post-pandemic learning setbacks.

    “The state faces significant operating deficits in the coming years, which are the result of lower revenue estimates, as well as increased cost pressures,” the analyst said.

    But the immediate enigma is Newsom’s strategy for the $8 billion.

    Newsom is projecting that state revenues to run schools and community colleges will be short $14.3 billion over three years: the budget year that ended in 2022-23, the current budget year of 2023-24, and the coming year. That number is calculated as revenue through Proposition 98, the formula that determines the proportion of the state’s general fund that must be spent on schools and community colleges — about 40%.

    Proposition 98 revenues are sometimes close but never exactly what a governor and the Legislature assume when they approve a budget. Revenues for the past and current years exceed or fall short of what they projected and not what they predict for the year ahead.  

    Budget analysts were particularly handicapped when calculating the 2023-24 budget. They didn’t anticipate the shortfall from 2022-23 and didn’t discover it until fall 2023, because of a six-month delay in the filing deadline for 2022 tax returns.

    Newsom is proposing to divert $5.7 billion from the Proposition 98 rainy day fund to fill in the current year’s deficit as well as what’s needed to sustain a flat budget, plus a small cost of living increase, for 2024-25. Draining the rainy day fund would require the Legislature’s OK.

    The remainder — and biggest piece — is the $9 billion revenue shortfall from 2022-23, which would be $8 billion after other automatic adjustments. That shortfall is technically an overpayment beyond the statutory minimum Proposition 98 funding guarantee. It fell dramatically from what the Legislature adopted in June 2022 to $98.3 billion that revenue actually produced. The biggest decline was in income tax receipts on the top 1% of earners.

    School districts have already spent funding from 2022–23, including on staff pay raises that they negotiated with good faith estimates. Newsom and the Legislature could try to deduct that overpayment from the current and 2024-25 budgets, but such a move “would be devastating for students and staff,” Patti Herrera, vice president of the school consulting firm California School Services, told a workshop last week with more than 1,000 school district administrators in Sacramento.

    As an alternative, Newsom proposes to find reductions from the non-Proposition 98 side of the general fund, which covers higher education, child care and all other non-education expenses, from prisons to climate change programs.

    “We are super grateful there will be no attempts to claw back” the money given to school districts in a past year’s budget, Herrera said.

    Newsom’s challenge is to make districts and community colleges financially whole without increasing the minimum Proposition 98 guarantee. Raising Proposition 98 could create a bigger obligation in the future, including potential deficits after 2024-25 — unless the Legislature raises taxes, a nonstarter in an election year.

    How Newsom is going to do this is a mystery. The one-sentence reference to it in his budget summary says only, “The Budget proposes statutory changes to address roughly $8 billion of this decrease to avoid impacting existing LEA (school districts) and community college district budgets.”

    Both the LAO and School Services said it’s their understanding from the Department of Finance that the payments from the general fund to cover the Proposition 98 overpayment would be made over five years, starting in 2025-26.

    “We have some questions about that proposal. Probably the most pressing one is how is the state going to use revenue that it’s not going to collect for several years to address a funding shortfall that exists right now,” said Ken Kapphahn, the LAO’s principal fiscal and policy analyst for TK-12 education.

    The questions are legal and political. The proposed statutory language, which may be released in a trailer bill in the coming weeks, will reveal how the state Department of Finance will finesse postponing balancing the 2022-23 budget that’s $8 billion out of kilter. Budget hearings next week in the Capitol may indicate how receptive legislative leaders are to further reducing general fund spending, which also is feeling a financial squeeze.

    A search for the extra $8 billion

    Additionally, Newsom is proposing several billion dollars of accounting maneuvers that will book spending in 2024-25 but delay and defer payments for programs and some state salaries until early 2025-26.  Included are $500 million in deferred reimbursements to the University of California and California State University for the 5% budget increase that Newsom committed to funding in 2024-25.

    “Many of these solutions involve moving costs to next year. That is one reason we have the state looking at a large deficit, not just this year, but the following year,” Kapphahn said. “I can’t recall another situation quite like this.”

    Barring a recession, which neither LAO nor the Newsom administration is forecasting, both Newsom and the administration are projecting general fund deficits averaging about $30 billion annually in the three years after 2024-25. Pushing the $8 billion solution for the 2022-23 Proposition 98 deficit, along with other general fund delays and deferrals into those years will compound difficult choices, according to the LAO.

    “Overall, the governor’s budget runs the risk of understating the degree of fiscal pressure facing the state in the future,” the LAO analysis said.

    The LAO suggested other options for resolving the 2022-23 deficit. It recommended applying the remaining $3.8 billion from the Proposition 98 reserve fund that Newsom hasn’t touched and looking for reductions in unallocated one-time funding such as an unused $1 billion for community schools and canceling $500 million for electric school buses. 

    Even with no cuts to Proposition 98 next year, many school districts and charter schools will likely face their own deficits in 2024-25. That’s because the projected cost-of-living adjustment for next year will not be enough to cover the loss of revenue from declining enrollments. The COLA, tied to a federal formula measuring goods and services bought by state and local governments and not consumer products, is currently projected to be 0.76%; it would be the lowest increase in 40 years, with one exception, the year after the Great Recession, in 2009. This would come on the heels of two years of near record-high COLAs of 6.6% and 8.2%.

    The analyst’s office projects the COLA may inch up to 1% by June, when the budget is set. At that rate, a hypothetical school district with 10,000 students would see declining revenues with an enrollment decline of only about 100 students.

    Paso Robles Joint Unified School District in San Luis Obispo County, with about 6,000 students, is among those with declining enrollment since the pandemic. As a result, the district, with about 800 full-time employees, anticipates a reduction of five full-time staff members in 2024-25 and perhaps 40 layoff notices the following year, said Brad Pawlowski, the assistant superintendent for business services.

    Pawlowski said he came away encouraged after School Services’ presentation that schools will be spared cuts in the next budget, while acknowledging it’s a long time between now and the budget’s adoption.

    “We have seen a common message between the governor and the Legislature to protect education. And that does make me feel good,” he said. But doing so, he added, “will mean finding other ways to make that up outside of Prop. 98. That’s going to be the real challenge.”





    Source link