Prop. 223 and School Administration

I was struck by the coincidence of your May 17 editorial urging a no vote on Prop. 223 and the appearance on the opposite page of Alexander Cockburn’s Column Left, in which he lays bare the statistics detailing “bureaucratic bloat” in California higher education.

He singles out for particular criticism the Kern Community College District. I retired from that district several years ago, after 35 years teaching history, French and Spanish, and I will attest to the accuracy of Cockburn’s remarks. During the budget squeeze he cites, faculty salaries remained stagnant, but not those of administrators. Neither the chancellor nor his assistant for instructional services had ever spent a day in instruction in a community college classroom.

Prop. 223 may not end the arrogant self-aggrandizement of educational bureaucrats, but it is a start.

CLIF GARRETT

Cambria

*

It seems to me that Prop. 223 is not only a bad deal for smaller, well-run school districts, but a bad deal for all California voters. Who is going to monitor compliance with these nebulous regulations? Who is going to pay for this new layer of bureaucracy?

If you do not like how your district is run, do what most of us have done. Elect responsive school boards.

BARBARA MORRIS

Brea

*

Despite what proponents claim, Prop. 223 threatens local school districts with the potential loss of almost $200 per student or $4,000 per classroom, even for minor or inadvertent violations. Meanwhile, the L.A. Unified School District will reap huge rewards. Prop. 223 doesn’t save taxpayers one dime. According to Prop. 98, the education funding initiative approved by California voters in 1988, the state is required to redistribute every dollar taken away from local districts. Informed Californians oppose this initiative.

JENNIFER J. LOONEY

President

Assn. of California School

Administrators, Sacramento

*

I am a teacher in the Kern High School District, and I urge a yes vote on Prop. 223. This proposition requires that 95% of school district income be spent on students rather than be absorbed by administrative overhead. Most of the changes required will be in the form of transferring authority to the school site level and properly accounting for administrative costs. Administrators complain that the copious amounts of record keeping and reporting required by the state and federal governments will make it impossible for some districts to meet this requirement. If Prop. 223 passes, I have no doubt that our state and federal legislators will read the election results and address this issue.

The real payoff if Prop. 223 passes is that our schools will have to make student progress the primary focus.

ADRIAN MAASKANT

Tehachapi