CTA | Inside CTA

In the spirit of the great civil rights leader Cesar Chavez, whose birthday and holiday we celebrate this month, I am reminded that we are activists with a lot to accomplish.

We are activists every day in our classrooms as we teach our students and prepare the next generation of this state. And we are activists in our local chapters and in CTA as we fight for the rights of all educators and struggle to make our public schools the best they can be.

But first. A lot has happened in the short time since we last met. I have stories to tell. I find myself once again in a familiar place – congratulating and thanking you for all your hard work in this recent election.

Yes, it was the second election of this school year…and the second time all of you and our 335,000 members helped CTA make a difference for our students, teachers, public schools, community colleges and universities.

Election night was longer than expected…as we, David, Dean, three board liaisons to Prop 55, Bob N., Lynette H., Lloyd P., Carolyn and many others waited for final results until the next morning…but in the end – thanks to your hard work – we passed Proposition 55 and completed a 10-year goal of CTA to provide state funds to repair rundown schools and build new classrooms to ease overcrowding.

With the passage of Prop 1A in 1998, Prop 47 in 2002 and Prop 55, we have provided more than $36 billion to help local school districts and colleges make much needed repairs and build new facilities.

Remember, it's more than bricks and mortar. Safe and modern schools improve student learning and help recruit and retain quality teachers. It was CTA that led the fight to get these initiatives on the ballot and it was CTA that led the coalition to make sure they passed.

I also want to thank you for your support of Propositions 57 and 58. Without the passage of these initiatives, our schools would be facing even deeper cuts than what's already hitting hundreds of districts across the state. I'll talk more about that in a minute.

We are disappointed with the defeat of Proposition 56, which actually would have brought some structural reform to our state budget process. The loss means our schools and our state budget will continue to fall victim to partisan politics. CTA will continue to push for reforms that will end the budget gridlock and hold lawmakers accountable for passing the state budget on time.

Our biggest challenge for the future is to provide the resources our kids and our members need. And meeting that challenge won't be easy. Despite what some in Sacramento think, that can't be done without raising someone's taxes.

I don't necessarily agree with the title, especially when it comes to student learning, since we know more students are graduating than ever before and more California students are going on to and graduating from college.

In fact, in spite of all the budget cuts you've endured over the last two years and all the meddling from politicians who don't know the difference between a classroom and a committee room, state test scores are up for the fifth year in a row. And even in those misguided API rankings, another six percent of schools reached the base target of 800 this past year. That success is a credit to all of you.

But what this show was really about is how California is failing its students and public schools financially. How our state has gone from providing one of the best public education systems in the country to a bare bones system that fails to meet the needs of all students.

The report told the story of Helms Middle School in San Pablo where more than 1,400 students are crowded into a school that was built for 800, and where in Santa Ana you have elementary schools with several thousand students on multi-track, year-round schedules.

The report talked about how California schools used to the set the standard for innovation and creativity, but now it's hard to even find an art class, music or drama programs, or counselors, nurses and librarians.

The report told the story of how summer school used to be free to all California students, but now districts can't even afford remedial courses to help kids pass the new rigorous state standards.

The report told how in 1959 California was the first state to create a comprehensive system of public colleges and universities, guaranteeing EVERY student a space somewhere in the higher education system, but now we are capping enrollments and raising student fees.

The report told the story of despite the promises of Howard Jarvis when he said, "Don't worry youngster, we're not going to hurt your schools," the erosion of school funding and the demise of local decision-making is directly traced to the passage of Prop. 13.

Public education is one of the civil rights issues of our generation. And it is a right that belongs to all children – regardless of your skin color, the language you speak or how much money your family earns.

That is why this Council voted to join Rob Reiner in sponsoring the Improving Classroom Education Act. The years of under funding and the more than $4 billion in education cuts are taking their toll, and it's time to take action.

Proposition 13 was designed to protect homeowners from huge property tax increases, not to protect big businesses from paying their fair share for education. In the past 10 years, the percent of property taxes paid by California homeowners has grown from 31% to 38%. While commercial property owners have seen their share fall by a similar amount. In San Francisco the amount of property taxes paid by homeowners is now 51%. You and I are paying more, while big business is paying less.

By raising the tax on commercial property from 1 percent to 1.55 percent, this initiative will raise more than $6 billion for public education – money that can only be spent in our classrooms and providing quality preschool for all kids before they start kindergarten.

This initiative protects homeowners, includes a tax break for small businesses and even when it's passed will keep business taxes in California well below the national average.

Although the layoff notices issued during the past few weeks are significantly less than last year – thanks in part to the passage of Prop. 57– more than 100 school districts have sent notices and hundreds of other districts are announcing budget cuts:

· More than 200 pink slips were sent to educators in West Contra Costa, where the district has also proposed closing all libraries, eliminating all counselors, and getting rid of all sports programs.

I know signature gathering hasn't been easy. It has been a long time since we asked our members, YOU to gather signatures. With the chaos that has been our life in and out of the classroom so far this year things have not gone as smoothly has I would hope, but here we are with less than two weeks left. We can't rely on others.

I know I can rely on UTLA President John Perez and Vice President Bev Cook and UESF President Dennis Kelley -- last week they stood up to friends and foes to support our initiative. Thank you John, Bev and Dennis.

Talk to your colleagues. If they have not turned in their signatures, encourage them to get them in. If you've collected your two, go out and collect 10 more. We need 1 million signatures by April 7th.

Soon after the election I called the Governor to say NOW the real work begins – the real work on issues such as testing and accountability, finalizing the state budget and our new Secretary of Education Richard Riordon. I'll explain the last one in a minute.

You may also have heard of a plan that is being proposed by Secretary of Education Richard Riordan. He has called it the "weighted student formula." I won't go into all the specifics here—they are enough to make your hair hurt. But I will cover some basics.

The plan has three parts.

First, a basic amount of school funding is established for each student. Additional amounts, or "weights," are added for factors that require additional resources. For instance, a special education student, a student living in poverty, or a GATE student would have additional weights added. This funding level replaces the current system of the base revenue limit plus categorical funds. The funding amount assigned to a child follows that child wherever he or she goes in a school district.

The second part is complete freedom of choice for parents. They may send their child to any school in a district subject only to available room. If there is limited space, then children are assigned based on a lottery. Parents are provided with information about how each school is doing and what kind of program it provides.

The third part is decentralization. Principals are allowed to make decisions about hiring and assignment of staff and about how things get taught at their school. The role of the district office is greatly reduced under this model. Unfortunately, the role of teachers is a little hazy. But the basic idea is to allow schools to develop programs that will serve kids. If they are successful, then students will want to attend their school. If they are not, then students will leave and the school will be closed or absorbed into other schools that are successful.
There is a lot more to it, but this description covers the basics. Now I can tell that a lot of this does not sit well with you and it doesn't with me either. But there are some elements that we can agree on, at least in principle.

First, and foremost, the supporters of this plan are concerned about the inequities in the distribution of funding to schools. We too are concerned about a more equitable distribution of resources, especially to what we call "the schools of greatest need." Second, we also want to see more control over curriculum and teaching returned to local school sites and to teachers; one size doesn't fit all just like our radio ads say. Unfortunately, the proposal, as yet, does not guarantee teacher involvement. We believe in the power of local schools. We do not believe in principals as God.

It is obvious that these ideas need a lot of work. The biggest problem is that, without adding resources to the system, we are just stealing from one under funded school to give to another. And, so far, there is no new money attached to the proposal.

That is not surprising. They were developed by academics and are based on the experience of a limited number of school districts. The people who are pushing them are living in an ivory tower. They have not learned what most of us learned when we left college and faced the reality of our first day alone in a classroom with all those kids: theories are great but they are no substitute for experience.

So as we look to the challenges still ahead of us…and yes they are challenging…I am encouraged by the words of Cesar Chavez who NEVER let the struggle defeat the goal: