House Bill 3, School Safety Bill

House Bill 3, from the 88th Regular Session of the Texas Legislature, is jam-packed with various school safety and security measures, including the requirement of an armed security officer for each campus and random-onsite annual audits and compliance monitoring by the Texas Education Agency (TEA). HB 3 takes effect September 1, 2023, and applies to both traditional districts and public charter schools alike.

Fiscally, HB 3 authorizes the use of bond proceeds to be used to pay the costs associated with complying with school safety and security requirements. HB 3 also amends the school-safety allotment, providing $15,000 per campus and raising the allotment to $10 per student in average daily attendance plus $1 per student in average daily attendance for every $50 basic allotment increase.

As for the armed security officer, each school board must determine the appropriate number of armed security officers for each campus, with at least one-armed security officer present during regular school hours. The security officer must be a school district police officer, a school resource officer, or a commissioned peace officer employed as security personnel. A school board can claim a good cause exception to the armed security officer requirement due to lack of funding or qualified personnel.

As noted above, TEA is required to monitor compliance with the new HB 3 security requirements. This includes conducting random onsite audits annually and intruder detection audits. HB 3 also authorizes the establishment of an Office of School Safety and Security within TEA. John P. Scott is the Chief of Safety and Security at TEA.

Each school shall provide to DPS and all local law enforcement agencies and emergency first responders an accurate map of each district campus and school building and provide DPS and local law enforcement an opportunity to conduct a walk-through of each district campus and school building using the provided maps.

TEA will adopt rules governing new and existing instructional facilities to ensure student safety, including construction quality and other standards related to the safety and security of school facilities. The Texas School Safety Center, at least once every five years, must review the building standards for instructional facilities and make recommendations to TEA on necessary changes to ensure student safety.

As we move towards September 1st when HB 3 takes effect, stay tuned to TEA and the Texas School Safety Center for critical updates on implementation of HB 3 requirements.

AB 1316 Fails to Pass the State Assembly

Last week AB 1316 was placed on the inactive file by the author on the Assembly Floor. Being placed on the inactive file means the measure will not move forward this year. The bill faced a Friday legislative deadline, the house of origin deadline. By June 4th all Assembly bills needed to be voted out of the Assembly and all Senate bills needed to be voted out of the Senate.

AB 1316 was an anti-charter school measure carried by Assembly member Patrick O’Donnell, the Chair of the Assembly’s Education Committee. In addition to numerous anti-charter school provisions, the measure would have also changed independent study law in the state and imposed new auditing standards on all schools. It was opposed by every charter school organization in the state as well as hundreds of charter schools. Mr. O’Donnell claimed the measure was about accountability but he drafted the measure without input from administrators, teachers, parents or students. We have seen him do this before with prior charter school legislation and will see it again from him in the future.

As AB 1316 moved from the Assembly Appropriations Committee to the Assembly Floor the level of opposition ramped up and legislative offices were swamped with calls, emails and letters raising serious concerns about the bill. The administration also amended their education trailer bill to extend the current moratorium on non-classroom based charter schools for three more years. This was a clear sign from the administration that they did not want to see AB 1316 reach the Governor’s desk.

These factors ultimately led to Mr. O’Donnell not being able to get 41 of his colleagues to vote for his bill on the Assembly Floor.

Though the moratorium was extended, defeating AB 1316 was a major victory for education reform advocates. It follows a victory from 2020 when the charter community came together to stop AB 2990 on the Floor of the Assembly and represents what we can accomplish with our collective voices.

Since 2021 is the first year of the two-year legislative cycle Mr. O’Donnell will have the month of January 2022 to move the bill to the State Senate. Under legislative rules all measures that failed the house of origin deadline will have that opportunity to move onto the other house. We will ask you to stay vigilant and will keep you posted on new education developments in the future.

Anti-Charter School Bill (AB 1316)

Assemblyman Patrick O’Donnell introduced an anti-charter school bill scheduled to be heard in the Assembly Education Committee next Wednesday, April 28th. The bill would have a devastating impact on charter schools and create new mandates on school districts.

(To view the bill go to leginfo.legislature.ca.gov and put in the bill number AB 1316.)

In short, the bill does the following:
  • Creates new auditing and accounting standards to create parity between school districts and charter schools. Requires training for auditors and creates an Office of Inspector General in the Department of Education, among other things.
  • Creates a new funding determination process for non-classroom-based charter schools that would reduce the amount of funding they receive from the state.
  • Rewrites Independent Study law in California to require more teacher and student contact, a minimum school day, and metrics for ending Independent Study agreements.
  • Change vendor contracts by requiring vendor personnel to hold an appropriate credential, enforce competitive bidding and prohibit agreements from being calculated as a percentage of charter school revenue.
  • Prohibits the use of multi-year track systems.
  • Limits the ability of small school districts to authorize additional charter schools.
  • Increases oversight fees that charter schools pay their authorizer.

Again, these statutory changes would be devastating to charter schools, and the financial impact would be incredibly harmful. We ask everyone to call or email the members of the Assembly Education Committee and state their opposition to these changes. Below is the contact information for those members.

Assembly Education Committee:

Assemblyman Patrick O’Donnell (Chair)
Phone number: (916) 319-2070
Email address: assemblymember.odonnell@assembly.ca.gov

Assemblyman Kevin Kiley (Vice Chair)
Phone number: (916) 319-2006
Email address: assemblymember.kiley@assembly.ca.gov

Assemblyman Steve Bennett
Phone number:(916) 319-2037
Email address: assemblymember.bennett@assembly.ca.gov

Assemblywoman Megan Dahle
Phone number: (916) 319-2001
Email address: assemblymember.dahle@assembly.ca.gov

Assemblyman Alex Lee
Phone number: (916) 319-2025
Email address: assemblymember.lee@assembly.ca.gov

Assemblyman Kevin McCarty
Phone number: (916) 319-2007
Email address: assemblymember.mccarty@assembly.ca.gov

Assemblywoman Sharon Quirk-Silva
Phone number: (916) 319-2065


Update: AB 1316 Moves Out of Committee

On Wednesday, AB 1316 by Assemblyman O’Donnell was voted out of the Assembly Education Committee on a party line vote, 5-2.  As we have described before the measure has a number of anti-charter school provisions that were developed without input from parents, students, administrators and teachers.  AB 1316 also creates several new mandates on school districts and creates an Office of Inspector General in the California Department of Education.

The measure next goes to the Assembly Appropriations Committee for a fiscal analysis and vote.  The author is pushing this as a good governance measure that is needed to ensure that non-classroom based schools are good stewards of public dollars but it goes well beyond that.  It would have a devastating impact on many schools and their programs and is an attempt to force more students back into in person instruction.  Coming off a year where the state forced almost all public schools students into a distance learning model it is ironic that there is legislation attempting to curb that model of education.

We will keep you updated as the bill continues through the process.

You can view AB 1316 here.

California’s Growth-Funding Freeze is Lifting

California’s Hold Harmless provision was paved with good intentions, and we all know that sometimes the best intentions have unintended consequences.

Back in June 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom signed an executive order freezing funding for California schools. The new state budget extended the 2019-2020 attendance levels and base per-pupil funding rates to 2020-2021. This “Hold Harmless” measure, intended to safeguard California schools from predicted declining enrollment due to the pandemic, had an unwanted negative impact on growing schools – charter schools and district schools alike.

The Error: Not Accounting for Growth

The shortsightedness was not considering growth. Several schools had received approval to open new schools or grow their enrollment in the fall of 2020. For schools that expanded their facilities or increased enrollment, this measure cut their legs from under them, as it prevented those schools from receiving the increased funding justified by their growth. This placed many such schools under undue duress.

During the 2020 summer, four charter schools filed a lawsuit (pdf) in the California Superior Court, claiming the state’s funding formula would illegally deny payments for new students.

The Shortcomings of SB 820

As a band-aid solution, the state legislature passed Senate Bill 820. This bill allows growing schools to receive higher levels of funding proportional to their increased enrollment. However, the plaintiffs in the Atkins case raised concerns. SB 820 provides for actual or projected enrollment funding, but it only honors the lower of the two enrollment numbers. Should a charter school succeed in enrolling many more students than projected, it would have to contend with the funding shortfall.

The other significant issue with SB 820 is that the bill specifically targeted non-classroom-based schools as ineligible for receiving any growth funding in fiscal year 2021. In other words, any additional students the school onboarded would receive $0 per student, inhibiting non-classroom-based charters in high demand from serving students.

What’s Happening Now

Recently, California lifted the Hold Harmless provision for fiscal year 2022. However, many charter schools are not filing the spring enrollment count in fiscal year 2021 (P2). This would typically set the stage for a school’s final apportionment for that year and determine the funding amounts for the first half of fiscal year 2022. With schools not filing in the spring, their Advance Apportionment (generally July 2021 – January 2022) funding will be at the same level as in the previous year.

When schools file P1 in January 2022, schools will claim their new student numbers and ultimately get a true-up for their additional students (this funding will be spread through the Spring 2022 funding amounts). For growing schools, this creates a seven-month gap to navigate.

During this timeframe, schools that have grown will have to manage all the additional expenses for onboarding and growth without the funding to match from the state until February 2022. This will be the most significant financial challenge for any school growing into fiscal year 2022.

Remember, this is a timing gap, not an actual financial burden in the school’s long run. New students will add long-term value to the school by providing additional resources to deploy back into the program, benefitting the entire student population.

Additionally, since this P1 count will be the first time funding numbers are changing since fiscal year 2020, it will be the first time in three years that charter schools are finally getting appropriately funded, based on reported and validated numbers. With many students going back to school in the fall, this will likely create an undue financial hardship to expanding schools.

Aside from the practical problem of securing financing, this is likely to have a demoralizing effect on school administrators and educators – it’s like getting penalized for success.

What Can Your School Do? Our Key Four Recommendations

  • Grow for efficiencies
  • Have cash on hand
  • Develop a solid fiscal projection
  • Have a financing resource available at your disposal

Growth Is Survival

As we covered in a recent blog post by Tricia Blum, the best way to reach sustainability and add value to your students is to grow. The main reason for this is in the simple formula of fixed costs vs. variable costs. By expanding your enrollment, you’re reducing your fixed costs’ footprint, leading to more control over your school’s financial position.

Growth is a long-term strategy. Once you onboard a new student, your school’s cost will decrease over time, while the revenue will increase. This will expand your school’s long-term financial resources, enabling you to develop and deploy new programs, buy supplies, hire more teachers, etc.

The challenge for California schools is that, unless they have significant reserves, they’re likely to need some form of interim financing.

Cash on Hand

Almost more important than the annual budget is your month-to-month cash flow. If the school isn’t paid on a portion of your students until the second half of the year, will you have the capital to cover the expenses related to those students?

Most schools aim to have a cash balance of up to 60 days of cash on hand. At that level, the school could survive two months in the event revenue is interrupted. If your school doesn’t have such a reserve, you should seriously consider an established financing source (Reminder: the funding gap will return to a full 7+ months in fiscal 2022).

A Solid, Realistic Projection

In uncertain times, the more certainty, the better. Work out a solid projection of your next fiscal year (and beyond). Add a realistic forecast of revenues, all anticipated expenses, a realistic forecast of cash-flow monthly going forward,  and always add a margin for incidentals.

Work with your back-office provider (BOP) or internal resource. If you don’t have someone like that, find a partner that can help you with financial planning. At Charter School Capital, we make our Business Consulting services available to each of our clients.

Send In the Cavalry: Having a Financing Resource at the Ready

Even with a reliable cash-flow forecast and known cash-on-hand, your school must have a financial backup plan. By doing so, you’re preparing your school for a potentially significant, unexpected revenue challenge with the state or another COVID-related crisis.

If you want to learn more about how to finance your school’s growth, download our growth guide or contact our team. We can help you forecast your cash flow, evaluate your school’s needs, and provide a financing backup plan that’s ready to execute in case of emergency.

Miguel Cardona - Secretary of Education

We recently wrote a blog post, asking which of the top likely picks for Secretary of Education our audience would have selected. While several of you expressed misgivings about Betty Rosa, Denise Juneau, Rep. Frederica Wilson, Lt. Gov Jacqueline Coleman and Rep. Jahana Hayes, all other options were met with mild approval.

None of our sources had mentioned Miguel Cardona – and he was not on our list. So what do we know about this dark-horse pick?

According to the Boston Globe, Miguel Cardona is a former public school teacher and principal, and he’s been the Connecticut Education Commissioner since 2019. Having attended public schools as a child, Secretary Cardona obtained multiple degrees at the University of Connecticut, including a Master’s Degree in Bicultural Education and a Doctorate in Education.

The Courant describes his childhood as a “goofy, little Puerto Rican kid” who grew up in a public housing project in Meridien.

From InsideHigherEd we learn that Dr. Cardona was the youngest principal in Connecticut when he became head of the Hanover Elementary School in 2003, at the age of 28. He was an assistant superintendent and rose quickly to his current position as head of K-12 education in the state.

From his official page, we learn Dr. Cardona served as the co-chairperson of the Connecticut Legislative Achievement Gap Task Force as well as co-chairperson of the Connecticut Birth to Grade Three Leaders Council. He also taught for four years as an adjunct professor at the University of Connecticut in the Department of Educational Leadership.

We can perhaps get a sense of the man through this segment of his recent speech:

“For too many students, public education in America has been a flor pálida: a wilted rose, neglected, in need of care,” he said. “We must be the master gardeners who cultivate it, who work every day to preserve its beauty and its purpose.”

“For far too long, we’ve allowed students to graduate from high school without any idea of how to meaningfully engage in the workforce while good-paying high-skilled, technical, and trade jobs go unfilled. For far too long, we’ve spent money on interventions and Band-Aids to address disparities instead of laying a wide, strong foundation of quality, universal early childhood education, and quality social and emotional supports for all of our learners,” he said. “For far too long, we’ve let college become inaccessible to too many Americans for reasons that have nothing to do with their aptitude or their aspirations and everything to do with cost burdens, and, unfortunately, an internalized culture of low expectations.”

The great news for charter schools: Miguel Cardona is a straight-shooter. And, while firmly entrenched in the Left, he is likely to be a friendly voice for charter schools.

Dr. Cardona did come down hard on the Achievement First charter network in 2020, for what he described as “the network’s repeated non-compliance with state regulations.” What many might have missed in that story is that Miguel Cardona, in his Connecticut leadership role in education, has been a charter school authorizer. This makes him the third of the last four Secretaries of Education who takes on that role after acting in an oversight capacity in charter authorizing work. (As the Fordham Institute reminds us, Secretary Ame Duncan led the Chicago Public Schools, currently responsible for 122 charters, Secretary John King was the NY Commissioner of Education, where a Board of Regents acts as authorizer over 93 charter schools. Betsy DeVos was the only Secretary in recent history who had never held any position of responsibility in charter authorizing networks prior to taking on the role.)

Another reason Dr. Miguel Cardona will make a good Secretary of Education is his intense appeal among those in Education.

“Teachers love him,” said Yale University professor Walter Gilliam, as quoted by the74million. “The teachers and administrators at this conference on educational equity were so incredibly excited that he was there in their school district. The buzz there was like there was a rock star in their school auditorium.” (Prof. Gilliam was speaking at a school district conference where Cardona was the keynote speaker.)

EdSurge summarizes it well: Teaching experience. An advocate for programs supporting underserved learners. A focus on tackling the digital divide and resource inequities laid bare by the pandemic.

To this, we’ll add, a strong voice in the championship of racial minorities and underserved student populations.

Everything we know thus far about Miguel Cardona leads us to expect from him a uniting influence, a voice of reason in the district-school vs. charter-school divide.

And such a voice of reason is very much needed at this time. Dips in college enrollment in low-income students have education leaders worried, and charter schools have shown their excellence: charter school alumni graduate from college at rates two to four times higher than the national average.

California Governor releases budget

On Friday January 8th the Governor released his annual budget proposal and it reflects the impact of COVID on the state. Now that it has been released the legislature will begin to hold hearings in their Budget Subcommittees. In May the Governor will release his May Revision which will reflect changes to his January proposal. The legislature has to pass the final budget by June 15th or they cease to get paid until it is passed. We will continue to provide updates to you throughout the process. Some of the highlights for K-12 include:

  • The Budget provides $85.8 billion in Proposition 98 funding to K-12 schools and community colleges for 2021-2022. When combined with a one-time supplemental allocation of $2.3 billion and the benefit of CalSTRS and CalPERS rates ($1.1 billion) the funding increases to $89.2 billion.
  • $2 billion in one-time funds to encourage schools to offer more on-line instruction during the pandemic. It excludes non-classroom based charter schools.
  • $4.6 billion in one-time funds to address learning loss due to the pandemic.
  • Creating a compounded combined cost-of-living adjustment of 3.84%.
  • Paying off all of the 2019-20 deferrals and $7.3 billion of the 2020-2021 deferrals leaving on ongoing balance of $3.7 billion in 2021-2022.
  • A one-time supplemental payment of $2.3 billion for K-14.
  • Language defining “exclusively in partnership with” to define how charter schools that work with pupils over 19 years of age can continue to receive ADA.

Investing in Educators:

  • $250 million in one-time funds for an Educator Effectiveness Block Grant for staff professional development.
  • $50 million in one-time funds to create statewide resources and provide targeted professional development on social-emotional learning and trauma-informed practices.
  • $8.3 million in one-time funds for the California Early Math Initiative for professional development for teachers working with students in pre-K through third grade.
  • $7 million in one-time funds to the University of California Subject Matter Projects to create high-quality professional development on learning loss.
  • $5 million in one-time funds for professional development on ethnic studies.
  • $225 million to improve the state’s teacher pipeline:
    – $100 million in one-time funds for the Golden State Teacher Grant Program.
    – $100 million in one-time funds to expand the Teacher Residency Program.
    – $25 million in one-time funds to expand the Classified School Employees Credentialing Program.

Special Education:

  • $300 million in ongoing funds for the Special Education Early Intervention Grant.
  • $5 million in one-time funds to establish professional learning networks to increase LEA capacity to access federal Medi-Cal funds and $250,000 for a lead county office of education to provide guidance for Medi-Cal billing within the statewide system of support.
  • $500,000 in one-time funds for a study to examine certification and oversight of non-public school special education placements.

Student Health and Well-Being

  • $264.9 million in one-time funds to enable LEAs to expand existing networks of community schools and establish new community schools.
  • $400 million in one-time funds, available over multiple years, for the Department of Health Care Services to implement an incentive program through Medi-Cal Managed Care Plans.

Who should be the next Secretary of Education?

As the Presidential transition begins, one question is on every school leader’s mind. Who will be the next Secretary of Education?

For charter school leaders, the question is even more critical. Once universally accepted 20 years ago, charter schools have become—as many other issues have—an issue deeply divided across party lines, across the country’s varied geographic regions and demographic segments. The current uncertainty surrounding who takes the job makes for uncertain times for all those associated with the educational choice movement.

Charter school leaders are mavericks, charting their own course, often in the face of big challenges, often with odds stacked against them. And yet, in spite of it all, charter schools grow, the movement grows, and students thrive.

All of this can be made easier or more difficult by the Secretary of Education.

POLL: Who would you want to see as Secretary of Education?

Last year, Biden promised his pick would be an educator.

“First thing, as president of United States – not a joke – first thing I will do is make sure that the secretary of education is not Betsy DeVos,” he said at a National Education Association forum for presidential candidates. “It is a teacher. A teacher. Promise.”

As early as May of this year, Forbes Magazine speculated that Senator Elizabeth Warren, Senator Michael Bennet, Sonja Brookins Santelises, currently CEO of Baltimore City Public Schools, or even the soon-to-be First Lady, Jill Biden – a college professor herself – could be President-elect Biden’s top choice for the job.

The May article in Forbes Magazine also mentioned:

  • Lt. Governor Jacqueline Coleman — Kentucky’s lieutenant governor and former public school teacher and principal.
  • Governor Tony Evers — Wisconsin’s governor and former superintendent of public instruction.
  • Lily Eskelsen Garcia — president of the influential teachers’ union, the National Education Association.
  • Randi Weingarten — president of the influential teachers’ union, the American Federation of Teachers.
  • Michael Sorrell — president of Paul Quinn College and alumnus of the Clinton Administration.
  • Freeman Hrabowski – president of the University of Maryland Baltimore County.

Should the position be offered to her, Randi Weingarten is unlikely to accept. In an interview Monday, she said, “I’m really happy doing what I’m doing. I’d be happy working with the Biden administration as president of the AFT (American Federation of Teachers).”

In September, DiverseEducation.com featured the list of potential picks. This list included former U.S. Secretary of Education and now president and CEO of the Education Trust John B. King Jr., and former U.S. Assistant Deputy Secretary of Education Jim Shelton, Rep. Alma Adams, who leads the Bipartisan Historically Black Colleges and Universities Caucus, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Rep. Joyce Beatty and Rep. Frederica Wilson.

In early November, Chalkbeat floated names, including Janice Jackson, the CEO of Chicago Public Schools, Sonja Brookins Santelises, the head of Baltimore schools, and William Hite, Philadelphia superintendent. These candidates have worked harmoniously with charter schools in the part, and are also the preferred candidates of DFER – Democrats for Education Reform.

Several commenters in this article mentioned Carol Corbett Burris.

However, at a recent event Biden campaign’s policy director Stef Feldman said that “the vice president is pretty committed to the concept that we need to be investing in our public neighborhood schools and we can’t be diverting funding away from them.”

According to InsideHigherEd.com, Lodriguez Murray, the United Negro College Fund’s vice president of public policy and government affairs, said that if asked by the transition, he’d suggest Rep. Alma Adams, a Democratic congresswoman from North Carolina and a former professor at Bennett College, a historically Black institution for women in Greensboro, N.C., who was instrumental in pushing to make federal funding for HBCUs permanent.

The Washington Post reported pointed at Tony Thurmond, the California state superintendent of public instruction; Congresswoman Jahana Hayes, a Democrat from Connecticut and a former national teacher of the year; Betty Rosa, New York state’s interim commissioner of education; and Seattle Public Schools Superintendent Denise Juneau are under consideration.

EducationPost.org gives a nod to many of the main names mentioned thus far, but adds a few names to the list: Sandra Boham – president of Salish Kootenai College in Montana, Fidel Vargas – president and CEO of the Hispanic Scholarship Fund, Susan Bunting – former superintendent of the year, Rep. Susie Lee – founder of Afterschool All-Stars in Las Vegas, NV, and former Governor of Massachussetts Jane Swift – who’s been focused on educational improvement through classroom innovation and technology solutions at LearnLaunch.

As one can see, there is no shortage of potential picks. The President-Elect has affirmed he’ll pick a teacher, which narrows it down to some extent. Whoever is chosen will shape the future of education for at least the next four years and, potentially, years to come.

Depending on that person’s opinions of school choice, charter schools could be more accepted – and the divide between teacher unions and charter schools could become less hostile. Alternatively, should President-elect Biden’s Secretary of Education pick not to advocate for the school choice movement, charter schools could face myriad uncertainty in their future.

—————————————-

Though there are still votes to be tallied we wanted to get you an early election update on some California races. Over the next week or so as additional ballots are counted some of these races will change. As expected, Joe Biden carried California in the Presidential race so we will focus on other races of note.

The two biggest fights in the state were over Proposition 15 and Proposition 22. Proposition 15 was an effort to increase property taxes on businesses to fund education and other programs in the state. It was supported by a number of labor unions, elected officials and liberal advocacy groups. It was heavily opposed by the business community and other groups. Proposition 15 is currently headed to defeat with a 48.3% – 51.7% margin. Going in the opposite direction Proposition 22 is headed to passage with a 58.4% – 41.6% margin.crowd hands raised

Proposition 22 was pushed by Uber, Lyft and the gig companies as an answer to AB 5 which passed the legislature last year. AB 5 mandated that a number of companies make their workers employees and not contractors. As a result Uber and Lyft led a coalition of companies in sponsoring the ballot measure which changes the law. It was a huge win for them and a bigger loss for the legislature which refused to carve certain companies out when passing AB 5.

In the State Legislature the Democrats will continue to hold super-majorities in both the State Assembly and State Senate. In the State Assembly Democrats will actually lose a seat as two Republicans were running against each other in the 38th district where Christy Smith ran for Congress instead of reelection. In the 38th Suzette Martinez Valladares will be the new Republican member. In the State Senate Republicans are threatened with a possible loss of up to 4 seats. The 23rd district is an open Republican seat where Republican Rosilice Ochoa Bogh is tied at 50% of the vote with Democrat Abigail Medina. In the 21st Republican incumbent Scott Wilk is barely ahead of Democrat Kipp Mueller 50.1% – 49.9%. In both the 29th and 37th districts Republican incumbents are trailing their Democratic challengers. Former Democratic Senator Josh Newman is up 51.6% – 48.4% over Republican Ling Ling Chang in the 29th. In the 37th Republican incumbent John Moorlach is trailing his Democratic challenger Dave Min 48.1% – 51.9%. If these Senate results hold it could leave the Republicans with only a handful of members in the body.

As stated earlier there are still votes to be counted but these are the state of some of the races at the current time.

You can use this website to locate which Assembly and Senate district that you reside in: FindYourRep.Legislature.ca.gov.

Legislature is impeding charter school growth

This year when the California Legislature passed their budget they did not provide funding for growing schools, both traditional and charter schools. In the education budget trailer bill, SB 98, the CA Legislature held school district and charter school funding harmless at the 2019 – 2020 levels which essentially capped funding and provides no new dollars for additional students enrolled in the 2020 – 2021 school year.

This created a lot of acrimony and opposition from different sectors in the education community. Governor Newsom acknowledged the issue, in a message to the legislature, when he signed the budget trailer bill urging them to craft a targeted solution for the funding issue.

Due to this lack of funding four charter schools have filed a lawsuit against the state and numerous education reform groups are lobbying the legislature to address the issue. The legislature adjourns for the year on August 31st so the race is on to enact a fix.

The Department of Finance has released their first draft of language to provide a legislative fix. Though it might work for some traditional schools it is not an ideal fix for charter schools. Additionally, the language specifically leaves non-classroom based charter schools out of the fix. There is no policy rationale to cut off funding for students deciding to change schools during this pandemic that is gripping the nation.

Many non-classroom based charter schools experience growth throughout the year and the COVID – 19 virus has seen these numbers increase for the 2020 – 2021 school year.

I urge you to call your legislator and advocate that they fund all students in California, regardless of what public school they attend. It is an issue of equity and fairness that should not be taken lightly.

You can use this website to locate which Assembly and Senate district that you reside in: FindYourRep.Legislature.ca.gov.

California ElectionsTuesday’s California Election Results

Tuesday’s California election results are still being decided in some races as ballots are still being counted. The results will not bring a significant change to the Legislature however, there were some very high profile races and a few interesting developments.

California State Senate Results

In the State Senate races there were virtually no surprises and the Democrats will still hold a supermajority after November’s general election.

The only notable races were in the 29th Senate District where the results set up a contest between Democrat Josh Newman, who was recalled after his vote for the gas tax in 2018, and current Republican Senator Ling Ling Chang. Chang only received 49.4% of the vote in the three-person primary while the two Democrat’s received 50.6% of the vote. This will make for a very competitive race in November.

In the 37th Senate District, Republican Senator John Moorlach received 50% of the vote while his two Democratic challengers received the other 50% of the vote. This sets up a second competitive race for the general election and puts another Republican seat in jeopardy.

California State Assembly Results

In the State Assembly races, there were several notable developments, but as with the Senate, the Democrats will retain a supermajority. In the 38th Assembly District, which was formerly represented by anti-charter school Democrat Christy Smith, two Republicans garnered the top two spots and will move on to the general election. This means the seat will represent a pick up for the Republicans in November. Smith is running for Congress and was not involved in the race.

In the 42nd Assembly District Independent Chad Mayes, who is a former Republican Assembly Leader, received 35.8% of the vote and he will face Republican Andrew Kotyuk who received 34.5% in the general election.

The 57th Assembly District saw a race that featured two political powerhouses as two of the candidates have relatives that serve in the Legislature. The second-place finisher was Lisa Calderon who is the mother-in-law of the current Assembly Majority Leader Ian Calderon. She received 19.7% of the vote. The top vote-getter was Republican Jessica Martinez with 29.5% of the vote; Calderon and Martinez will face off in November. Finishing third and missing the November primary election was Democrat Sylvia Rubio with 17.8% of the vote. Rubio has a sister that currently serves in the State Senate and a sister that currently serves in the State Assembly.

In the 59th Assembly District, the current incumbent Democrat Reggie Jones-Sawyer will face off against Democrat Efren Martinez in November. Martinez actually outpolled Jones-Sawyer 49.6% to 45.7%.

In the 72nd Assembly District incumbent Republican Tyler Diep was outpolled by former Republican State Senator Janet Nguyen 35.1% to 26.5%. The two will face off in the November general election.

In the 73rd Assembly District the current incumbent, Republican Bill Brough, failed to reach the November general election after coming in fourth place. The seat will stay in the Republican column but Brough’s time in the Legislature is coming to an end.

In the 74th Assembly District the Republican’s have an opportunity to pick up a seat as the incumbent, Democrat Cottie Petrie-Norris, failed to reach 50% of the vote. She garnered 49.5% of the vote while her two Republican opponents received over 50% of the vote.