There’s a Reason for School Mandates

* (Shirley) Carey’s column (“Unfunded Mandates a Drain on Education,” Feb. 3), shows a serious lack of understanding of mandates and a total lack of knowledge as to the real issues.

To even suggest that school districts should have the flexibility to allocate funds as they see fit is ludicrous.

Prior to the federal mandate of providing a free appropriate public education for disabled students, school districts totally excluded these students from public education or would pick and choose the students they would educate.

The laws were enacted because school districts could not be trusted to provide and protect the civil and moral rights of these young people. So much for flexibility!

Some mandates and their policies, such as the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1991 and The Individual With Disabilities Education Act of 1990 (formally called Education of the Handicapped Act of 1975), simply cannot be expressed alone in terms of dollars and cents as Mrs. Carey would have you believe.

Some policies must symbolize the commitment of society to a higher goal, such as equality of life for disabled persons.

JESSIE CABRERA

Huntington Beach

* What a shame for Mrs. Carey blaming Special Education, ADA and other federal mandates for her school district’s financial troubles, for large class sizes, fewer books, etc.

Whatever happened to no salary increases for administrators, fewer administrators, improved fiscal management and greater consideration for the health, welfare and quality of education for all children.

How dare Mrs. Carey consider the elimination of ADA and IDEA, which are among the best pieces of legislation ever enacted in our country during the last 20 years.

PAT ALEX

Huntington Beach