Powerful unions have joined forces with former Los Angeles Schools Supt. Austin Beutner to call for state intervention to stop what they claim is the abuse of voter-approved funding to expand arts education in California.
In a letter to Gov. Gavin Newsom and other state officials, Beutner and the unions alleged that some school districts are taking the funding, approved by voters in November 2022, to expand arts education and using it for other purposes. Total funding this year is $938 million.
The unions that signed the letter are the California Teachers Assn., the state's largest teachers union, and the CFT, the other major statewide teachers union. The letter was also signed by the largest unions in the Los Angeles Unified School District: Service Employees International Union Local 99, which represents the largest number of non-teaching school employees, and the Los Angeles United Teachers Union, the second-largest local teachers union in the United States. . his mom. Other unions include Teamsters Local 572, which also represents Los Angeles School District workers, and the Oakland Unified teachers union.
“Some California school districts are intentionally violating the law by using new funds provided by Proposition 28 to replace existing spending for arts education in schools,” the letter said.
Under the new law, schools must use the money to increase arts programs, and each school can decide how best to add to its programs. The arts windfall is drawn from the state's general fund – in an amount equal to 1% of total funds spent on schools serving students in transitional kindergarten through 12th grade. So the money is ongoing and will generally increase every year.
The letter does not provide any specific examples or mention areas where unions are suspected of violating the law. Beutner said there are concerns that whistleblowers could become targets of retaliation.
The unions and Beutner are calling on the state to require districts to certify within 30 days “that Prop 28 funds have not been used to replace any existing arts education spending in any school.” Additionally, the signatories want the state to require school districts to list the “additional arts and music teachers” each school district is using in the current school year and “how that compares” to the previous year.
“We say more means more,” said Cecily Myart-Cruz, president of UTLA. “That means every student in every school in the entire state, and that should also translate into more teachers and classified staff in every school.”
Beutner authored Proposition 28 after leaving L.A. Unified in June 2021 and voters subsequently approved the ballot measure by a nearly two-thirds margin. Students are scheduled to benefit starting from the current academic year.
The text of Proposition 28 cites research that the vast majority of public schools “fail to provide high-quality coursework across the arts disciplines” and that “access to arts education is worse for schools with high poverty rates,” adding that “the reason for the steady decline in Arts and music education is directly linked to insufficient and unstable funding for such programs.”
If misuse of Proposition 28 funding becomes widespread, “instead of hiring approximately 15,000 additional teachers [statewide] and assistants, the funds will instead be used to pay for existing programs. “This means that millions of children will not get the arts education that voters promised them.”
The letter was sent to the governor late Friday, according to its authors. Neither the governor's office nor the California Department of Education, which also received the letter, had an immediate response.
Although the letter did not name the school district, Myart-Cruz singled out LA Unified as one of the violators, and perhaps one of many.
“LAUSD replaces Proposition 28,” Myart Cruz said. “And I can only bet that counties across the state are doing the same.”
She said the union was trying to collect documents, but the school system was slow in providing the requested information.
At two recent school board meetings, David Hart, the district's chief business officer, said the district is adhering to legal requirements.
“I feel very confident that we are not in any way violating the intended addendum versus replacement,” Hart told board members in response to a question on Feb. 20. “I will admit that there is school-by-school variation.”
The budget of one Los Angeles school, Dixie Canyon Elementary School in Sherman Oaks, has been cited by Proposition 28 advocates as an example of alleged misuse of funding.
At that school, the issue was raised by Audrey Lieberstein, a parent leader for the PTA and school boards, who provided school budget documents and copies of correspondence with L.A. Unified to The Times.
In emails to district officials, Lieberstein noted that last year's school budget allocated $48,766 for an art teacher for two days a week. There was no such allocation in this year’s budget, according to budget documents. An additional budget document she said she got from the director shows the arts position is being paid for through the Prop 28 fund.
Lieberstein sees this situation as a violation. She said the Prop. 28 money should have been in addition to what the school spent the previous year.
Dixie Canyon had 610 students last year and a poverty rate of about 25%. According to the state's funding formula, that would add up to Proposition 28's budget of about $78,000 — on top of the $48,766 already provided for a part-time school teacher plus other previous funds used for materials.
In a Feb. 16 email to Lieberstein, the Northern District's comptroller. David Baca disagreed with her interpretation of what the school is entitled to, suggesting — as Hart did at the board meeting — that the law requires increased spending at the district level, but does not specify what should happen at each school.
“Proposition 28 calls for the funds to be used to increase funding for arts education programs within school districts. While this may vary from school to school, the law assesses overall expenditures and investments at the district level,” Baca wrote. “We are pleased to share that the Los Angeles Unified has increased investments in arts education programs.”
The letter to the state addresses such an interpretation, without referring to a specific school:
“At least one school district claims that it is not replacing funds for arts education because the total amount spent by the district has increased. Again, this is not the correct understanding of the law. The law clearly states that every public school will receive additional funds for arts and music education. Proposition 28 would provide a certain amount of funding to each school to make this possible.
When contacted by L.A. Unified about Dixie Canyon and the parent documents, it said in a statement that it had no additional explanation other than Baca.
Spokesman Shannon Haber said arts spending levels “meet and exceed the statutory requirements of Proposition 28.” She added that Supt. Alberto Carvalho directed staff to provide “a comprehensive, multi-layered survey of all investments and expenditures that would increase opportunities for increased effectiveness in arts education.”
Beutner reviewed Dixie Canyon's correspondence at the Times's request, and said that based on his initial review, the district appeared to be violating the law at that school.
Beutner also pointed to examples of school districts that appear to be using new arts funds properly, including systems in Santa Monica, Compton and Bakersfield.
Deciphering the potential misuse of funds can be complicated. First, under law schools don't have to spend money this year. Good reasons for not spending money can include not being able to hire a teacher, or needing to purchase equipment or provide training. Schools have three years to spend the money, but they're not supposed to sit on it just to do so, Beutner said.
According to state requirements, school districts must annually certify that their spending was adequate and report additional information. Schools should also create a spending plan. But the state did not publish specific deadlines in its guidance.
In essence, the letter seeks to tighten and accelerate the first version of the accountability system.
Beutner said it's important not to wait, because it will be difficult to recover student money that has already been misspent.
Lieberstein told school officials she wants students to take full advantage of the arts infusion.
“I am simply trying to understand the law and how it is implemented for all of our children,” Lieberstein wrote in a Feb. 17 email to the district. “If there is an error in allocation or interpretation, schools may have a chance to restore their original source of arts funding and receive Prop 28 in addition to what the law intended! This would be a huge win for our public schools and will help instill faith in the district.”
If you have concerns about how your school or district uses Proposition 28 funds, tips, or related news documents, please contact howard.blume@latimes.com.
