Public school districts were winners in Gov. Gavin Newsom’s revised budget proposal for next year, with boosted funding that includes $2.4 billion in ongoing increases for services to students with disabilities, money that education officials have said is badly needed as the number of children who need extra help grows.
Newsom, who overcame dyslexia as a child, called the increase for students with disabilities “the largest investment in special education in California’s history,” adding, “I don’t know that many other states can lay claim to this kind of investment, maybe in American history.”
The statewide gain for school districts is a relief for Los Angeles Unified, which will likely be able to pencil out recent raises provided to employees to avert a strike, although long-term financial challenges remain for the state’s largest school system.
The governor also proposed a 14-week paid pregnancy disability leave for TK-12 and community college employees starting or enlarging their families.
“If you’re going to focus on recruitment and retention, you have to be pragmatic and address the needs of young women,” Newsom said.
For California’s three public higher education systems, the picture was mostly status quo, with comparatively small levels of increased funding.
The fundamental driving factor behind the increased education spending is the state constitution, which, under current positive revenue projections, requires 40% of the state budget to go to public school districts and community colleges.
Newsom proposed how to spend that money and highlighted his education record, which has included adding the new grade of transitional kindergarten for 4-year-olds.
He also has, in some years, tried to shift or lend education dollars to other sectors of the budget. To advocates and education unions, such maneuvers amounted to improper or possibly illegal siphoning — and that’s one detail they were watching for Thursday.
The advocates were generally happy with what they heard, while also pulling out calculators to assess whether Newsom owes still more to education.
On one hand, “you can’t argue with a budget that provides more discretionary dollars to schools than we’ve probably seen in a decade, but nonetheless, we’ve got to go through the process of looking at the numbers and make sure that [the] minimum guarantee is honored … without looking greedy,” said Kevin Gordon, president of Capitol Advisors Group, which lobbies for TK-12 school systems.
The California Teachers Assn. quickly asserted that schools are being shortchanged, estimating that $3.9 billion is being withheld.
CTA President David Goldberg also praised “significant and long-fought-for wins for educators, students, and families.”
Here is a breakdown of some key details:
How did school districts fare in the governor’s proposed budget?
One big item was an across-the-board increase of 4.31% as a cost-of-living adjustment to school districts and community colleges, a figure higher than what was legally required, even if it might not entirely keep pace with true inflation.
Newsom presented his updated budget as containing $151.6 billion for TK-12 education, including an increase of $6.4 billion from his initial January budget proposal. Of this, $4.6 billion would be allocated to an education “Rainy Day Fund” as ballast against future economic downturns.
But that still left funding for some sizable boosts. For example, funding for services to students with disabilities is 43% higher than in the 2025 budget, according to the governor’s office.
There also were major increases for teacher training and for community schools, which partner with other entities to provide extra physical and mental health supports and family social services.
How did higher education fare?
Last year, the University of California and California State University put austerity measures in place after previous state budget and federal funding reductions. But the state’s university systems Thursday praised the governor’s budget revision, which largely preserves his January proposal, keeping planned financial increases for UC and CSU, and upping funding for community colleges.
For UC, the proposal keeps a $350-million increase in funding. For CSU, it’s a roughly $365-million increase. Both systems also face a postponement of increases in funding promised in the past — unchanged from the first version of the budget in January.
In a statement, UC President James B. Milliken said the funding proposed Thursday would “help ensure that the university remains affordable and accessible.” Milliken said UC faced “ongoing federal funding uncertainty and increasing operational and labor costs.”
As before, the plans for UC and CSU connect some of the funding to goals of increasing enrollment of California residents.
Newsom on Thursday also criticized federal funding threats, saying the Trump administration’s attempt to freeze hundreds of research grants to UCLA last year was “dumb.” A federal judge restored those grants for now as an ongoing lawsuit works it way through court.
CSU Chancellor Mildred García said the revised budget “demonstrates the administration’s belief in the CSU and confidence in the state’s return on investment.” García said the budget would support enrollment growth, graduation rates and student services.
Both higher education systems have warned state funding increases may not be enough to avoid cuts, hiring limits or reduced student services. The systems are navigating federal funding cuts, stricter visa requirements for foreign enrollment, changing Education Department guidelines on student loans and Trump administration civil rights investigations.
UC’s core budget is about $11 billion, and more than 40% comes from the state, with tuition and fees covering most of the rest. CSU is more reliant on Sacramento, with about 60% of its $9-billion core budget coming from the state.
How about early childhood support?
The funding for pregnancy leave would provide job security and pay for mothers while the parent is unable to return to work before or after giving birth, but it is still unclear how much pay employees would receive. The funding does not include paid family leave for care and bonding time with the baby for either parent.
Past attempts to address pregnancy leave had been vetoed by governors Jerry Brown and Newsom.
Despite a push from providers and advocates, the proposed budget revision does not include funding to expand state-subsidized child care for families, nor does it include funding for the union-backed initiative to overhaul how child-care providers are paid. But there is still hope that budget adjustments between now and June could fund some of the 44,000 additional spaces once promised by Newsom.
Under the proposal, it is not certain whether the current number of subsidized child-care spaces, about 366,700, can be retained. Changes in federal funding and in how legal cannabis is taxed means roughly 4,200 slots could be cut. Some funding from the state’s voucher program could help offset some of that loss, but it’s unclear by how much.
“His opening line is that California is dominating,” said Laura Pryor, research director at the California Budget & Policy Center. “We’re not dominating in child care. He made a promise to expand the number of subsidized child-care spaces, and he’s not delivering on that promise.”
As for rate reform, the child-care industry is looking to Assembly Bill 1981 to lock in a timeline that would allow providers to be reimbursed for their services to better reflect the actual cost of running a child-care home or center.
The budget proposal was a disappointment to child-care advocates who have been seeking a cost of living raise for both state preschool staff and child-care providers who run programs with subsidized spaces. Both programs saw a reduction in the adjustment, to 2.01%.
Based on the budget numbers, can L.A. Unified afford the deals it just signed with its unions?
In the short to medium term, at least, the answer appears to be yes, even though new salary commitments to three major unions will exceed $1 billion a year. Also, there are other unions and management salaries to adjust for.
However, not all budget issues are rosy for L.A. Unified. About 500 school-board approved layoffs, many in technology support, are in process and an additional, still unclear, number of workers on temporary contracts have been alerted they will not be renewed.
The new union deals also call for modest class-size reduction and the hiring of more counselors.
Overall, the district continues to struggle with declining enrollment and looming pressures to close schools, as well as long-term pension and retiree benefit obligations.
Will services to students with disabilities improve?
Maybe. School districts have seen an explosion in special education costs in recent years, forcing them to encroach on their general funds.
School districts could simply use the new money to reduce this encroachment, freeing funds for other purposes. Some districts also might use this new state funding to offer more to students with disabilities.
The post What Newsom’s proposed budget means for education in California appeared first on Los Angeles Times.
