Under the dome, not all talk is about the budget
Published: July 1, 2011
Even though the primary focus of attention in Sacramento has been the state budget—which was still unresolved as this installment of CSBA’s “Under the Dome” went to press—important K–12 policy issues are also being actively debated.
Teacher evaluation
Two main bills deal with teacher evaluation. One, Senate Bill 257 by state Sen. Carol Liu, D-Pasadena, is still primarily a spot bill—one that describes legislative intent, with the details to be written later—but it may become a vehicle for major changes.
The other is Assembly Bill 5 by Assembly Member Felipe Fuentes, D-Los Angeles, which would mandate school districts to adopt a very elaborate teacher evaluation system. CSBA has been involved in discussions with Fuentes on this bill since last summer and agrees that the system he envisions makes sense, although it is untested and its potential impact on student outcomes—if any—is unknown.
CSBA is concerned, however, that the mandated system would be extremely costly and that the bill could expand the scope of collective bargaining by making the entire evaluation system—not just procedures—subject to bargaining. It does not make sense to impose expensive new mandates when the state continues to fail to meet its constitutional obligation to pay for existing ones.
Therefore, CSBA’s position on AB 5 is “oppose unless amended/support if amended” to address our concerns regarding cost and collective bargaining.
Other mandates
Speaking of mandates, CSBA was instrumental in getting both houses of the Legislature to reject Gov. Jerry Brown’s proposal to suspend selected mandates for the budget year. The association’s concern is that, as a practical matter, it makes no sense to suspend and then restart mandates. Local educational agencies would still feel obligated to offer those services but would lose their ability to be reimbursed for the costs.
CSBA’s alternative—adopted by both houses—is to have the appropriate policy committees decide through legislation—with public input—which mandates should be retained and which ones should be eliminated or modified. AB 202 by Assembly Member Julia Brownley, D-Santa Monica, which CSBA supports, would also require the Legislative Analyst’s Office to conduct periodic reviews of mandates to assist in the ongoing identification of those that should be repealed or modified.
In addition, CSBA supports SB 64 (Liu), which would revise the mandate claims process for LEAs by establishing an advisory commission to advise the Commission on State Mandates on test claims and incorrect reduction claims. The bill would shift some of the administrative burden associated with filing test claims from LEAs to the advisory commission. The advisory commission would also be required to periodically review claiming parameters and guidelines and act on behalf of LEAs in establishing reasonable reimbursement methodologies. It is hoped that SB 64 would reduce both the cost and the time it takes to approve test claims and begin reimbursements.
Student fees
AB 165 by Assembly Member Ricardo Lara, D-South Gate, was introduced in reaction to an American Civil Liberties Union lawsuit over student fees. In the wake of the lawsuit, CSBA issued an advisory last November urging LEAs to review their policies on student fees and ensure that their practices are consistent with their policies. (An updated advisory is available on CSBA’s Legislation and Legal Web page: Click on “ELA Updates.”)
The law on student fees has not changed in 12 years, and LEAs whose policies and practices are consistent with CSBA’s sample policies are well within the law. Meanwhile, CSBA has been working with Lara and the ACLU to negotiate an agreement on AB 165 and has made progress on several issues, including striking language that would have prohibited outside organizations that use school facilities (like soccer clubs or scouting organizations) from assessing fees.
The main thrust of AB 165 would be to create an administrative process for receiving and resolving complaints. CSBA believes this would benefit both parents and LEAs by providing a process outside of the courts for resolving violations. However, work continues to resolve concerns over other aspects of the bill that go beyond this core purpose.
Accountability
State Sen. Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, president pro tem of the Senate, has introduced SB 547 to replace the Academic Performance Index with the Education Quality Index beginning with the 2013–14 school year. The EQI would incorporate more areas of school performance, and student performance would be assessed in more academic areas.
This direction toward a broader-based evaluation system is consistent with CSBA’s longstanding concern that the API is too narrow in scope to provide an accurate and meaningful measure of school performance. Rather than actually establishing a new index, SB 547 would create a framework and process for developing one with input from CSBA and other stakeholders.
CSBA is supportive of SB 547 in its current form but is working with Sen. Steinberg and other stakeholders to address problems that, while technical in nature, have serious policy implications. The goal is to have an accountability system that is fair, comprehensive and understandable and that will not result in negative unanticipated outcomes.
Charter school accountability
AB 360 (Brownley), CSBA’s sponsored bill dealing with charter school accountability, has passed the Assembly. If it becomes law, it would improve the fiscal accountability of charter schools by ensuring that their board members are subject to the same open government and conflict-of-interest laws as LEA board members—specifically, the Ralph M. Brown Act, the Public Records Act and Government Code provisions prohibiting conflicts of interest. The Legislature passed a prior version of this bill in the last session, but it was vetoed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Hopefully Gov. Brown will sign AB 360 if it reaches his desk.