State School Chief Honig Undaunted by Investigations, Feuds Over Policy

Now in his 10th year as California’s chief school executive, Bill Honig has run into a patch of rough weather.

He is being investigated by Atty. Gen. Dan Lungren for possible conflict of interest and misuse of state funds in connection with a private education program that until recently was run by his wife, Nancy, from the Honigs’ San Francisco home.

Looking into the same set of circumstances, auditors for the U.S. Department of Education have concluded that Honig’s relationship with the Quality Education Project constitutes a conflict of interest and have asked the State Board of Education to refund $222,590 in federal funds that they say were used to benefit the project.

The superintendent’s problems also include a running feud with some members of the state board over who has the authority to set California educational policy. The disagreement has escalated into a lawsuit brought by the board against the schools’ chief.

Although Honig has a good relationship with Gov. Pete Wilson, and Wilson’s proposed budget for next year treats public schools relatively well, school districts throughout the state will have to make cuts. In addition, there is little money to implement the reforms that Honig has been pushing since he was elected state superintendent of public instruction in 1982.

As Honig’s troubles have mounted, there have been recurring rumors that he will resign, reports that he flatly denies.

“I’m sticking around,” Honig said in a recent interview. “All the hard work of the last nine years is beginning to bear fruit. There’s no way I’m going to leave unless they drag me out kicking and screaming.”

Educators generally agree that Honig’s efforts have resulted in tougher curriculum standards, better textbooks, improved testing and a start on better training for teachers.

Improvements have been made in junior high school--now called middle school--and a new emphasis has been placed on the importance of teaching students to solve problems.

“For the last 10 years or so, Bill has had a conception of reform that is a model for reforms that are now happening all over the country,” said Marshall S. Smith, dean of the Stanford University School of Education. “It wasn’t on paper, he just saw it intuitively.

“He understood that curriculum, textbooks, assessment, teacher training all had to go together in what we now call ‘systemic school reform.’ The guy has vision and presence and great drive and energy. He has become a national leader in these areas.”

Honig said: “We have won the war to persuade people that this is the way to go. We’re no longer fighting the idea that tougher curriculum standards are somehow elitist.”

He has support from key legislators.

“I think he’s been a fine superintendent,” said Assemblyman John Vasconcellos (D-Santa Clara), chairman of the Assembly Ways and Means Committee. “He’s on the line for kids the way he ought to be. He puts kids first and I think that’s marvelous.”

Honig believes the reforms are starting to pay off in terms of improved test scores, a lower dropout rate and more high school graduates moving on to college, among other indicators.

His next goals include high school reforms, finding ways to involve more parents in their childrens’ education, and restructuring schools so that groups of teachers, parents and administrators work cooperatively and more decisions are made at schools, not at district headquarters.

But California’s economic slump and resulting tight budgets have made it difficult for schools to hold on to the gains that have been made, much less start any bold ventures.

“This is the toughest year to do anything,” Honig said, “but when the recession ends, and it will end, we’ll be well-positioned to create world-class schools.

“All the major players--the governor, legislative leaders, the business community--are on board,” he added. “When the lights all turn green, then you can make progress.”

But some critics say Honig is unrealistic about what can be achieved in such austere economic times. While he is evangelizing about the classrooms of the future, they say, many present-day schools are increasing class size, laying off teachers and librarians and having trouble finding money for paper, pencils and restroom towels.

“Probably a third of the school districts in the state, including all the big urban districts, are in deep financial trouble,” said a veteran of many Sacramento educational finance battles. “Bill is still talking about how nice the frosting is on the cake, when mice have already eaten the cake.”

There is little question that Honig has retained enthusiasm for his job. Rattling off new ideas at a rapid clip, waving his arms like a windmill, he seems to have been slowed down hardly at all by his personal troubles.

But the schools chief conceded that he spends at least one-quarter of his time dealing with legal questions that have been raised by the attorney general or the federal auditors or plotting strategy in his continuing battle with the State Board of Education.

“Psychologically, it’s very draining,” Honig said. “It’s always there.” Perhaps most stressful of all have been the problems presented by QEP, the parent involvement program that his wife formerly ran.

Nancy Honig, an energetic businesswoman who urged her husband to run for the top state schools job in 1982 and campaigned effectively for him, decided that one way to improve the performance of low-income and minority children was to involve their parents in what was going on in school.

Working out of an office in the Honigs’ home in the prosperous Pacific Heights area of San Francisco, she found experts to devise parent involvement strategies and raised money to pay the staff and spread the word about the program.

From the beginning, Honig was warned by some aides not to permit his wife to run an organization that would deal with California school districts and especially not to allow the enterprise to be run from his home. He ignored the warnings.

Over the years, QEP grew into one of the most successful programs of its kind in the country. By the end of last year, QEP had contracted with more than 300 schools in 54 school districts, mostly in California.

Nancy Honig and others raised more than $11 million for the nonprofit organization. For several years, she received no pay for her QEP work, but by the time she resigned the presidency of the organization several weeks ago she was earning more than $100,000 a year.

The QEP offices occupied several rooms in the Honig residence--space that was provided rent-free at first but for which the Honigs received $30,000 in rent in 1989 and 1990, according to the audit conducted by the U.S. Department of Education’s inspector general’s office.

The federal audit and the state attorney general’s investigation have focused on the $222,590 in federal money, channeled through the state Department of Education, that was used to start QEP programs in Fremont, Pasadena and the Sweetwater Union High School District in San Diego County.

In polite language, federal auditors said QEP “actually directed the activities of the school district personnel,” resulting in a “material financial benefit” for QEP.

“In effect, they were laundering the money through the school districts, to QEP,” said a source familiar with both investigations.

Joseph D. Carrabino, former president and still head of the anti-Honig faction on the State Board of Education, said: “The audit’s main point is that state money was given to districts to free up people to work for QEP.”

Carrabino said this is only one of several “rip-offs” that have taken place since Honig has been in charge of the education department.

Honig called the federal audit findings a flimsy case that rests on the far-fetched claim that school district personnel became de facto employees of QEP.

“The obvious flaw in this position is that the employees actually worked in the district and did the job,” Honig said. “The government received full value for its expenditures.”

The superintendent also said U.S. Department of Education auditors “aren’t my best friends” because he has won several past disputes over proper state use of federal funds.

As for Lungren’s investigation, Honig said: “What’s the crime here? I don’t see it. Sure, Nancy was making a good salary, but if she wasn’t, she’d probably be making more someplace else.

“OK, I made a mistake, I’m not perfect, but what’s the worst I’ve done wrong here? The worst is that maybe I was too close to a charity that my wife ran, but I don’t see anything very criminal in that. There’s a thousand things that deserve more rebuke than that.”

Honig said he will reply soon to the federal auditors’ report. Then U.S. Secretary of Education Lamar Alexander, or one of his deputies, must decide whether to order repayment of the money.

Honig also said that people in the attorney general’s office recently told him that they would not decide for another two months whether to press charges against him for either conflict of interest or misuse of state funds.

Meanwhile, the superintendent’s feud with members of the State Board of Education continues.

This dispute has its origins in earlier controversies between Honig, who describes himself as a liberal Democrat, and conservatives over such issues as bilingual education, the teaching of evolution and, most recently, plans to funnel tax money to parents to pay for private school tuition. Honig favors the first two and opposes the latter.

When appointments by former Gov. George Deukmejian gave conservatives the upper hand on the 11-member board, they tried to curtail Honig’s authority over budget and personnel, among other issues. After months of acrimonious exchanges, the board voted in November to sue Honig, asking the California Supreme Court to decide whether the board or the superintendent should determine educational policy.

However, the terms of Carrabino and another Honig opponent, Dorothy J. Lee, have expired, along with that of Honig supporter Kenneth L. Peters. One position remains vacant. New appointments by Wilson may determine the future of the lawsuit and the nature of the board’s relationship with the superintendent.

Many people who keep an eye on public schools do not believe that Honig’s usefulness has been damaged by the QEP problems or by his feud with the state board.

“I don’t think any of this has diminished Bill’s effectiveness with the Legislature or with people around the state,” said state Sen. Gary K. Hart (D-Santa Barbara), chairman of the Senate Education Committee.

“I see Bill a lot and there are days when the pressures of what’s going on weigh heavily on him,” said Wes Apker, executive director of the Assn. of California School Administrators. “But I don’t see any decline in his energy level or his effectiveness.”

Maureen DiMarco, Wilson’s secretary for child development and education, put it this way: “He hasn’t run out of gas, the tank is still pretty full.”

Michael Kirst, a Stanford University education professor who served on the State Board of Education with Honig from 1975 to 1981, is concerned that Honig’s bag of troubles may make him less effective in the campaign against the Parental Choice Initiative, a voucher plan that may appear on the November ballot.

“Honig is a master campaigner on these initiatives and we will need him to defeat the voucher initiative,” Kirst said. “The question is, will the public regard him as damaged goods?”

Honig will weather the current storms, Kirst added, “unless the attorney general indicts him. If that happens, all bets are off.”