School Choice Initiative Boosts Other Reform Plans

The prospect that California voters might support the school choice initiative in November is providing a new and handy political sales tool for supporters of a variety of legislative proposals to overhaul schools, including a sweeping plan to dismantle the Los Angeles Unified School District.

School reformers are using the initiative--on the ballot seven months earlier than expected--as a rallying cry to push for passage of their own school legislation, including proposals for statewide public school choice and a bill to transfer more decision-making authority to individual Los Angeles schools.

Kevin Teasley, director of Choice in Education, which sponsored the drive to place the initiative on the ballot, said he is pleased that lawmakers are “leveraging the initiative to their benefit” but maintained that “the public needs to understand that these changes are happening only because the initiative is on the ballot.”

The ballot measure would allow tax funds to be taken from public schools and spent on private school tuition. It would provide families with vouchers equal to about half of what the state spends per pupil in its public schools. The vouchers would amount to between $2,000 and $2,500 a year.

Gov. Pete Wilson recently called the November special election, thereby moving the school choice initiative from the June, 1994, election, when it was expected to be on the ballot.

An opponent of the initiative, state Senate President Pro Tem David A. Roberti (D-Van Nuys) said the election is changing the political dynamic on school issues at the Capitol.

He said it probably will help him persuade other lawmakers to back his bill to break up the 640,000-student Los Angeles district and create seven smaller districts.

“The voucher, I hope, impresses the education Establishment to understand that people are pressing for radical change,” Roberti said, adding that he hopes educators “will recognize that the breakup of the school district is the meaningful kind of change that will keep the public schools intact.”

At the heart of the debate is how voters in the Los Angeles Unified School District--the state’s largest--view their public schools. Those favoring breakup contend that in many places, including the San Fernando Valley, parents are so unhappy with schools that, unless Roberti’s measure becomes law, they will vote for the school choice initiative, improving its statewide chances of approval.

“Everybody has recognized that what happens in Los Angeles Unified on a number of questions could well impact how people vote on the voucher,” said one legislative consultant who follows education issues but asked not to be identified.

Roberti’s is not the only school proposal enmeshed in the debate.

Assemblywoman Betty Karnette (D-Long Beach), a former Los Angeles schoolteacher, is pressing for her bill that, although it stops short of the radical change sought by the initiative supporters, seeks to decentralize administration of Los Angeles schools.

“I think my bill would actually show that the people in Los Angeles are interested in local control,” Karnette said. “I am hoping that my bill will deter people from voting for the voucher.”

A similar theme was repeated by Assemblyman Charles W. Quackenbush (R-San Jose), who for several years has championed public school choice. He has authored a measure to expand the ability of students in one district to go to public school in another district.

“I think having the voucher initiative on the ballot will give some impetus to the idea,” Quackenbush said. His bill has been linked to another proposal that would allow more choice within public school districts.

Sen. Gary K. Hart (D-Santa Barbara), chairman of the Senate Education Committee, said that the voucher initiative may well prove to be a wedge to expand public school choice.

Reform proposals such as those seeking public school choice now “have a greater chance of passing,” said Hart, who last year championed a measure setting up charter schools free from many local rules and state regulations.

When Hart introduced the measure he acknowledged that one of his motives was to blunt support for the school choice initiative.

Indeed, Assemblyman Pat Nolan (R-Glendale), who favors the initiative, cited the charter schools legislation to show that the voucher measure has been a catalyst for change in the Legislature.

“Even if the voucher initiative were to be defeated, it’s already succeeded in pushing the Legislature and the educational Establishment toward cleaning up their act and reforming,” Nolan said.

Some voucher critics say it is unclear whether approval of any of the school reform proposals would change the way voters view the initiative or compel lawmakers to pass the breakup measure. The breakup proposal is pending in a Senate committee and is strongly opposed by Latino and African-American lawmakers and school district officials.

Veteran school lobbyist John Mockler, whose clients include the Los Angeles school district, said the outcome of November’s voucher election will not be influenced by what happens in the Legislature, even if lawmakers reach agreement by the end of the summer on school reform measures.

“(That’s) pretty quick to change attitudes,” Mockler said. “People don’t change that quickly.”