Bustamante Assails Division of School Computer Funds

Relying on the power of his office, Assembly Speaker Cruz Bustamante on Wednesday made a personal plea to a powerful state panel to end what he called the unfair distribution of bond funds for equipping schools with computers.

Bustamante went before the State Allocation Board to call for the money to be distributed equally to schools across the state, warning that voters will be unwilling to approve bond funds in the future if reforms are not made.

His complaint stems from disclosures last month that members of the funding panel pushed for large amounts for their home districts before any other counties had applied for the money.

“Around this place,” Bustamante told reporters, referring to the Capitol, “if you’re in power you have license to shovel extra pork into your district.”

Two lawmakers who sat on the seven-member Allocation Board, he said, “rolled all the dough to their districts” last November.

He was referring to state Sen. Jim Brulte of Rancho Cucamonga and Assemblyman Bill Leonard of San Bernardino, both Republicans. According to Bustamante, the legislators used their clout on the board to provide schools in San Bernardino and Riverside counties with a combined $35 million in computer equipment funds--even before the rest of the state submitted proposals for the money to the allocation panel.

Brulte, however, has said that the process was fair and that the countywide school technology projects deserved the money.

The Allocation Board is empowered to distribute funds raised through voter-approved bond measures, in this case the $3 billion approved for schools and colleges under Proposition 203 in March 1996. The money was designated for construction, modernization and technology-related projects.

The board agreed Wednesday to defer action on any further computer-related funding requests for Riverside and San Bernardino counties, according to a Bustamante spokesman. Members also agreed to examine the speaker’s plan for a more equitable distribution of such funds.

The issue of how the state distributed proceeds from Proposition 203 surfaced last month when Bustamante blocked an unrelated bill that would have helped school districts obtain new classrooms related to class-size reduction in the primary grades.

Brulte said it was unfair to scrutinize only one type of education funding--the money for technology. While San Bernardino and Riverside schools might have gotten more than other counties in that category, he said, they are perennially behind urban counties in many other areas. Brulte is supporting a bill that would equalize school funding.

He also said that Riverside and San Bernardino were the only two counties to submit proposals for the technology funds, although he had encouraged Los Angeles County to seek the money as well.

On Wednesday, Bustamante again took up the issue, going directly to the Allocation Board. He said the problem goes beyond the single decision involving Riverside and San Bernardino.

“The Allocation Board does not have any process in place” for any of the funds it hands out, he said.

The speaker displayed a chart showing that many counties that voted heavily for Proposition 203 received relatively small amounts from the bond fund. The chart, however, included funds from several sources in addition to the bond.

In Los Angeles County, he said, 64% of voters favored the measure but the county received $6.74 per student for modernization and other projects related to education technology. San Bernardino County received $106.15 per student; its voters approved Proposition 203 by 58%. The solution, Bustamante said, is to cap the amount a school district could receive for computer purchases and related equipment. He suggested $50 per student.