Wednesday, October 29, 2014

Capistrano Unified School District Students Sue the State of California for Withholding $200 Million Dollars Per Year in Per Pupil Funding

Capistrano Unified School District Students Sue The State of California For Withholding $200 Million Dollars Per Year In Per Pupil Funding
Taxpayers were promised that if they voted to pass Prop 30, the revenue would go to students!
THAT WAS A LIE!
80% of Prop 30 Money is going to Public Employee Salaries and Benefits - not to Students as Promised!


Although the State has record high revenues, Prop 30 money is not reaching the classrooms as promised. Despite the passage of Prop 30 and the implementation of California’s new education funding system, many school districts remain severely underfunded and continue to face deficits and budget cuts.

California’s New Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF)

As part of the 2013-14 Budget, the State of California enacted a new system for funding education called the “Local Control Funding Formula”. The formula replaces revenue limits and most categorical programs with a universal “Base Grant”, and then provides significantly more funding for English learners and low-income students.

The “Base Grant” is the same amount for every student in the California.
LCFF Base Grant Amount:
2013-14: $6,500 per student
2014-15: $7,643 per student
2021: Projected to grow to $8,500 by 2021
What is Wrong With The Formula?
Wealthy suburban school districts with a relatively low percentage of English Language Learners, and socioeconomically disadvantaged students are being funded solely by the LCFF Base Grant, an amount that is insufficient to provide any student with an “adequate” education as defined by California content standards.

What Constitutes an Adequate Education?
“Adequacy” is defined as an educational system that provides all students with access to instructional programs and services consistent with the California content standards in all subject areas, including core subjects, visual and performance arts, and physical education.


What Does It Cost to Provide A Student with an “Adequate” education in the State of California?
Calculated Per Pupil Costs, including Base Costs with Special Needs Weightings are as follows:
Average:     $11,094 - $12,365
Urban:         $11,508 - $12,718
Suburban:   $10,726 - $12,077
Towns:        $  8,932 - $  9,896
Rural:          $10,615 - $11,881


California is now ranked 50th in the Nation in Per Pupil Spending - CUSD is one of the most underfunded Districts in the State of California and in the Nation.
2012-13 Average Per Pupil Expenditure K-12

United States: $11,226
California: $9,501
Capistrano Unified: $7,002

By any measure $7,002 is an insufficient amount of money to provide an adequate education for any student.
Sources:
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/fd/ec/currentexpense.asp Per Pupil Spending by District California as of Feb 18, 2014 http://capousd.ca.schoolloop.com/file/1229223560406/1218998864154/1331468026996732138.pdf Capistrano Unified School District Financial Report- Governor’s 2014-15 Proposed Budget and May Revise Update
CUSD has a student population of 50,000 students.
If CUSD were to be funded at the California State Average, CUSD would receive an additional $125 million dollars per year in revenue.
If CUSD were funded at the National average, CUSD would receive an additional $211 million dollars per year in revenue.


The New LCFF Restores Education Funding To 2008 Levels by the Year 2021

CUSD has cut $152 million from the District’s budget since 2008 – Restoring Budgets to 2008 levels will not begin to provide adequate funding for students now and certainly not in the year 2021

CUTS TO STAFF AND PROGRAMS SINCE 2006
2006-2007 & 2007-2008 - $10.5 million
  • Classified Support Reductions (CSEA) (Eliminated 94 positions)
  • Classified Support Reductions (Teamsters) (Eliminated 52 positions)
  • Program and Service Reductions
  • Reduced home-to-school transportation from 47 to 18 routes operated under a “parent pay” program
2008-2009 - $20.5 million
  • Management Reductions (Eliminated 26 District-level management and confidential positions and 5 site-level positions)
  • Classified Support Reductions (CSEA) (Eliminated 42 positions)
  • Classified Support Reductions (Teamsters) (Eliminated 2 positions)
2009-2010 (April 2009) - $25.6 million  

2009-2010 (September 2009) - $7.8 million

2009-2010 Reductions $33.4 million ($25.6 + $7.8)
  • Management Reductions: (Eliminated 21 management / confidential positions at the District level and 11 elementary assistant principals)
  • Classified Support Reductions (CSEA) (Eliminated 55 positions)
  • Increased Class Sizes: (Increased class sizes in 2nd and 3rd grade from 20 to 31.5 students)
  • Reduced Instructional support services: (Reduced Counselors, elementary music teachers, psychologists, and resource teachers on special assignment)
  • Program and Service Reductions: Eliminated or reduced many programs to utilize categorical flexibility including:
Adult Education·   
Summer School·  
PE Grants·  
Deferred maintenance·  
Cal-SAFE·   
Art & Music Block Grant·      
CAHSEE Instruction·   
PAR·       
Instructional Materials·   
Professional Development and School and library Block Grants
  • · Furlough Days
CUEA: 3 non-instructional days +1 instructional day
Management: 11 – 12 days
2010-2011 - $34.9 million
  • Salary Restorations              $8.2 million
  • 2010-2011 Reductions $26,709,000 ($34.9 - $8.2)
  • Program Reductions (5-11-10) $ 5,500,000
  • Eliminated Positions (6-29-10) $ 2,465,000
  • Management Reductions (2011-2012 Eliminated 2 middle school assistant principals)
  • Classified Support Reductions (CSEA) (Eliminated 28 positions and reduced calendar days and hours for 9.5 month employees)
  • Increased Class Sizes: (Increased class sizes in 1st grade from 20 to 31.5 students)
  • Furlough Days
CSEA: Up to 4.5 days 2010 - 2011
CUEA: 1.5 – 3 days
Teamster: 4 days since
Management: 6 days
  • Salary Consessions:
CUEA 1.2% = $ 19,700,000
Teamsters 1% =  $ 490,000
CSEA .7% = $ 5,334,000
CUMA 5.25% = $ 1,470,000
  • Salary Restorations - All Groups $ (8,250,000) (Students Still Had Furlough days - large class sizes - deferred maintenance - cuts to programs)
  • Total Reductions after $8,250 in restorations: $ 26,709,000
2011-2012 - $ 9.6 million
  • Classified Support Reductions (CSEA) (Reduced Calendar for 10 month employees)
  • Salary Rollback: (Management 3.7%)
  • Medical/Dental Benefits – (Effective January 2011, all employees pay a larger share of the monthly premium cost % not specified)
2012-2013 - $30 million
Even with the Passage of Prop 30, CUSD was forced to cut $30 million from its 2012- 2013 Budget
*Note- The District uses a "MULTI-PRONGED APPROACH" to Budget Cuts. Proposed Budget Cuts were based on the passage or failure of Prop 30. If Prop 30 passed CUSD would need to cut $30 million - if Prop 30 failed CUSD would need to cut $51 million. This approach assumes that cuts start with unilateral cuts to non-negotiated items and then only looks to negotiated cuts from employee groups if needed. This is a fundamentally flawed approach to addressing CUSD's budget shortfalls. Everything, ("unilateral reductions" and "negotiated concessions") should be on the table together. To force unilateral cuts first then back into negotiated cuts as a last resort, has resulted in a disproportionate amount of cuts to core education programs while shielding the 90+% of the budget that goes to employee compensation from the bulk of cuts CUSD has faced the past five years.
This can be illustrated by looking at the 2012- 2013 Collective Bargaining Agreements and the corresponding 2012-2013 Budget that was adopted June 27, 2013.
Source: The Community Budget Forum June 7, 2013 laid out the tools CUSD had to make $30 - $50 million in cuts (Depending on the passage or failure of Prop 30). See also CUSD 2013- 2014 Fiscal Year Budget Up-date June 12, 2013: http://capousd.ca.schoolloop.com/file/1229223560406/1218998864154/8712875548042173714.pdf
Unilateral- Non-Negotiated Reductions = $11 million
  • Management (CUMA):  $1.5 million
  • Classified (CSEA):  $3.5 million
  • Certificated (CUEA): $3.5 million
  • Redirect Categorical Funding: $1.1 million
  • Other area of savings: $1.4 million
Negotiated Employee Concessions: $39.7 million in identified cuts
Savings from Class Size increase: = $8.2 million
  • Increase Class Size by 1 all grades saves  $4.2 million
  • Increase Class Size by 1.5 all grades  $6.4 million
  • Increase Class Size by 2 all grades saves  $8.2 million
Savings from Freezing Salary Schedule: = $2.7 million
  • Management (CUMA)    $162,796 mid-year Jan 2013
  • Classified (CSEA)        $932,554 full-year
  • Certificated (CUEA)      $1,432,144 mid-year Jan 2013
  • Teamsters                $207,044 full-year
Savings from 8 Furlough Days all employees = $9 million
  • Management (CUMA):  $100,059 per day
  • Classified (CSEA):  $338,361 per day
  • Certificated (CUEA):   $1,191,788 per day
  • Teamsters:   $43,415 X 8 per day
Furlough Days from 2011-2012 contract + 2012-2013 contract
  • Management (CUMA)   6 current + 2 = Total 8 Furlough Days
  • Classified (CSEA)      0 current + 8 = Total 8 Furlough Days
  • Certificated (CUEA)   3 current + 5 = Total 8 Furlough Days
  • Teamsters                 4 current + 4 = Total 8 Furlough Days
Savings from each 1% Salary Rollback =  $19.8 million
  • Management (CUMA)   Each 1% = $194,030
  • Classified (CSEA)      Each 1% = $589,227
  • Certificated (CUEA)   Each 1% = $2,031,912
  • Teamsters                 Each 1% = $68,832

Total Identified Cuts $51 million
* When Prop 30 passed CUSD only needed to implement $30 million of the $51 million in identified cuts. CUSD chose not to implement the $19.8 million in identified Salary Rollbacks- preserving employee salaries.

2013-2014 Reductions $14 million
With the Passage of the States New LCFF the District received $8.42 million in new funding. However, because there was no LCAP in place to ensure accountability; CUSD passed a 2013- 2014 budget without having any employment contracts in place (over 92% of the budget). Execution of 2013- 2014 employment contracts were intentionally delayed so that new LCFF money could be added to revenues. WHY? So that the COLA + "New" LCFF moneys could be combined to trigger $5.622 million in salary restorations from the 2010 teachers strike.
By delaying contract negotiations CUSD paid employees $5.622 million in salary restorations then started the process of identifying $13,381 in budget cuts for 2013-2014- our current school year.
The result:
Protected Salaries- Pensions- Benefits- for employees
Cuts to student services- Increased class sizes- cuts to programs- deferred maintenance- 3 instructional furlough days
According to the California Association of School Business Officials:
“Years of budget deferrals and cuts to revenue limits, categorical program funding and other areas of the Proposition 98 budget have taken a toll on the quality of education – one that has impacted students, teachers and staff. In many districts class sizes have been increased, the length of school years have been reduced, programs have been reduced or eliminated, and employees – at the classified, certificated and management level – have been furloughed and/or laid off. As proposed, the LCFF would redistribute funds on this severely depressed base.
Even with the passage of Proposition 30, many school districts are facing difficult decisions with respect to further budget cuts. Further, with the recent sequestration order at the federal level, absent further action from Congress school districts will be facing budget reductions to programs that are targeted towards some of the very students who would benefit from the implementation of the LCFF. These reductions would almost certainly result in further encroachment on districts’ General Fund dollars.
For these reasons, CASBO believes the base grant funding levels are too low, and perhaps insufficient to achieve the LCFF’s stated goal, which is to take districts to the current average undeficited school district revenue limit. Even if, for the sake of argument, it is assumed that this particular goal can be reached, we would argue that it is a hollow goal. Few people would argue that 2007-08 funding levels approach a level of adequacy that is sufficient to provide all California students with the opportunity to achieve proficiency levels established by the California State Board of Education.
CASBO supports the adoption of an "aspirational” goal for the state funding of public K-12 schools that would, at the very least, set a goal that California be in the top 10 in per-pupil funding in the United States.”
The Continual Lack Of Adequate Funding Has Resulted In A Notable Decline In Student Performance Across All Demographics.

Capistrano Unified Promotes itself as the Highest Performing Large School District in the State. Not anymore, CUSD has dropped to #4 this year- API is down 9 points from last year. Below is the API for California’s largest districts.

Poway Unified                   894      0
Fremont Unified                891 +6
Clovis Unified                    878 -2
Capistrano Unified           874 -9
Corona-Norco Unified     824 -2
Garden Grove Unified      820 -1
San Francisco Unified     806 -1
Elk Grove Unified              805 -5
San Jose Unified              799 -6
Riverside Unified              798 0
Mt. Diablo Unified             792 -2
Sweetwater Union High 792 -6
San Juan Unified              784 +15
Long Beach Unified                783 -1
Sacramento City Unified 760 -10
Fontana Unified                757 +2
Los Angeles Unified        750 +4
Moreno Valley Unified      745 +3
Santa Ana Unified            743 -12
San Bernardino Unified 729 +2
Fresno Unified                  723 -3   
Oakland Unified                721 -7
Stockton Unified               697 +1
Kern High                           654 -3

Source: http://api.cde.ca.gov/Acnt2013/2013GrowthDstApi.aspx?cYear=&allcds=3066464&cChoice=2013GDst2

What the LCAP Data Shows:
CLASS SIZE:
Largest in California
Largest in the Nation
Current “AVERAGE” Class sizes:
Kindergarten: 30.5 students to 1 teacher
Grades 1-5: 31.5 students to 1 teacher
Grades 6-8: 32.5 students to 1 teacher
Grades 9-12: 34.5 students to 1 teacher
Source CUEA Employment Contract at page 19 http://www.cuea.org/information_v2/info_contract.php
These are “average” class sizes. That means that many classrooms have as many as 40 students to a single teacher. The number of students is substantially higher than the State’s expected 24:1 ratio under the new LCFF. CUSD has used class size increases to balance its budget every year for the last ten years.
Even with the passage of Prop 30 and new LCFF money, CUSD was forced to, once again, seek a waiver from the State for Class Size Reduction for 2014- 15.
Approval of the 2014- 2015 waivers would eliminate financial penalties for increasing class sizes in:
Kindergarten: Average 33 students to 1 teacher with a maximum of 35 students to 1 teacher in an individual classroom
Grades 1- 3: Average 34 students to 1 teacher with a maximum of 35 students to 1 teacher in an individual classroom
Grades 4-8: Averages above 29.9 – no maximum set for individual classrooms
Source: February 12, 2014 Board Meeting Agenda Item #1 and 2
Only 39% of the Students graduating from CUSD are ready for College level courses in English Language Arts.
Despite the wealth and parental education levels in south Orange County, only 39% of the Students graduating from CUSD are ready for College level courses in English Language Arts.
99% of English Language Learners are unprepared for college level course-work in English Language Arts.
  • Students Ready for College Level English Courses: 39%
  • Students who need additional coursework to become ready (conditional): 19%
  • Students not ready for College Level English Courses: 42%
Source: March 26, 2014 Board Meeting Agenda Item #4 “Data for the Local Control Accountability Plan”
Source: CUSD Local Control Accountability Plan March 5th, 2014  https://docs.google.com/document/d/1V3uLUFcLqDOUz4dHWo70jMbpHfSamP5ewh-hO5cQiWg/pub at page 10 slide #20 and #21
Only 23% of the Students graduating from CUSD are ready for College level courses in Mathematics.
Despite the wealth and parental education levels in south Orange County, only 23% of the Students graduating from CUSD are ready for College level courses in Mathematics.
22% of English Language Learners are prepared for college level course-work in Mathematics.
CUSD Students are weak in mathematics across all demographics.
Note: If the jobs of the future rely on a STEM education - 77% of students graduating from CUSD will not be qualified for a “job of the future”.
  • Students Ready for College Level Math Courses: 23%
  • Students who need additional course work to become ready (conditional): 46%
  • Students not ready for College Level Math Courses: 31%
Source: March 26, 2014 Board Meeting Agenda Item #4 “Data for the Local Control Accountability Plan” http://capousd.ca.schoolloop.com/file/1229223560406/1218998864154/1463621950735616281.pdf  Agenda Item #4 - Exhibit 4 - Slide 16

Source: CUSD Local Control Accountability Plan March 5th, 2014  
Only 54% of Students Complete A-G Requirements by Graduation
For definition of A-G Requirements see: http://www.ucop.edu/agguide/a-g-requirements/
Total: 54%
Asian: 72%
Black or African American: 46%
Hispanic: 38%
White Not Hispanic: 53%
English Learner: <1%
Re-designated: 41%
Special Education: 11%
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged: 30%
Source: March 26, 2014 Board Meeting Agenda Item #4 “Data for the Local Control Accountability Plan”
Source: CUSD Local Control Accountability Plan March 5th, 2014  
By Senior Year only 59% of Students are on Track to Graduate
Students Credit Status - Freshman
CUSD has 4,035 High School Freshman - 81.5% are on track to graduate with that number dropping to 59% by 11th Grade
Source: March 26, 2014 Board Meeting Agenda Item #4 “Data for the Local Control Accountability Plan”
Source: CUSD Local Control Accountability Plan March 5th, 2014  https://docs.google.com/document/d/1V3uLUFcLqDOUz4dHWo70jMbpHfSamP5ewh-hO5cQiWg/pub at page 13 Slide 27
Students Credit Status - Sophomores
CUSD has 4,058 High School Sophomores - 73.3% are on track to graduate with that number dropping to 59% by 11th Grade
Source: March 26, 2014 Board Meeting Agenda Item #4 “Data for the Local Control Accountability Plan”
Source: CUSD Local Control Accountability Plan March 5th, 2014
Students Credit Status - Juniors On Track to Graduate
CUSD has 4,922 High School Juniors - 59% are on track to graduate

Source: CUSD Local Control Accountability Plan March 5th, 2014  https://docs.google.com/document/d/1V3uLUFcLqDOUz4dHWo70jMbpHfSamP5ewh-hO5cQiWg/pub at page 14 Slide 29
DISTRICT FALL 2013 PSAT
(Max Score Each Section 80)
Math:   Total 53.04
English Learners 44
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged 45.78
Writing:    Total 50.38
English Learners 34.44
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged 44.49
Reading: Total 52.23
English Learners 34.22
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged 45.87
Source: March 26, 2014 Board Meeting Agenda Item #4 “Data for the Local Control Accountability Plan”
Source: CUSD Local Control Accountability Plan March 5th, 2014 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1V3uLUFcLqDOUz4dHWo70jMbpHfSamP5ewh-hO5cQiWg/pub at page 15 Slide 30
DISTRICT 2013 SAT
(Max Score Each Section 800)
Test Takers: 2,147
Math: 542
Writing: 553
Reading: 537
Source: March 26, 2014 Board Meeting Agenda Item #4 “Data for the Local Control Accountability Plan”
Source: CUSD Local Control Accountability Plan March 5th, 2014  https://docs.google.com/document/d/1V3uLUFcLqDOUz4dHWo70jMbpHfSamP5ewh-hO5cQiWg/pub at page 15 Slide 31
DISTRICT 2013 ACT
(Maximum Score for each section is 36 points)
Composite: 24.8
English: 24.7
Math: 25.2  
Reading: 24.8
Science: 23.9
Source: March 26, 2014 Board Meeting Agenda Item #4 “Data for the Local Control Accountability Plan”
Source: CUSD Local Control Accountability Plan March 5th, 2014  https://docs.google.com/document/d/1V3uLUFcLqDOUz4dHWo70jMbpHfSamP5ewh-hO5cQiWg/pub at page 16 Slide 32
50.2% of CUSD graduates attend a Community College.
Source: March 26, 2014 Board Meeting Agenda Item #4 “Data for the Local Control Accountability Plan”
Source: CUSD Local Control Accountability Plan March 5th, 2014  https://docs.google.com/document/d/1V3uLUFcLqDOUz4dHWo70jMbpHfSamP5ewh-hO5cQiWg/pub at page 16 Slide 34 and 35
Despite the wealth and parental education levels of Parents in CUSD, Only 39% of students graduating from CUSD enter a four-year college or University
Of the 39% that are attending a 4-year college, less than 10% are attending selective 4- year private universities or colleges.
61% need remedial coursework in English Language Arts before they can begin college level coursework.
Source: March 26, 2014 Board Meeting Agenda Item #4 “Data for the Local Control Accountability Plan”
Only 1% of CUSD English Language Learners demonstrate a readiness for college-level course-work in English Language Arts.
Source: March 26, 2014 Board Meeting Agenda Item #4 “Data for the Local Control Accountability Plan”
Of those students who are attending college 77% need remedial coursework in Math before they can begin college level coursework.
Source: March 26, 2014 Board Meeting Agenda Item #4 “Data for the Local Control Accountability Plan”
Insufficient Funding Is Only Part Of The Problem ...
Students In CUSD Will Continue To See Cuts To Student Services For Years To Come Under California’s New LCFF
CUSD children are attending school in overcrowded classrooms, in facilities that are no longer safe, with staff to student ratios that are not safe.
Source: Board Audio of the August 14, 2013 Board Meeting - Public Comments- RE: leaking roof at SC High with Rats Falling from the Ceiling.
at 15 minutes
Looming increased expenditures, and further decreases in Local Revenue will require drastic cuts to employee compensation and/or student services in order for the District to Balance it’s future budgets.
Under the new LCFF, CUSD received $7,002 per student this year. Per pupil spending is projected to increase to a paltry $8,500 by 2021. Looming Expenses will by far exceed the additional revenue projected under the new LCFF. If $7,002 in per pupil spending is insufficient now… $8,500 by 2021 will be devastating.
Deferred Maintenance:
During the economic downturn, the State allowed Districts to use Deferred Maintenance Funds for General Fund purposes. According to the District’s Facilities Master Plan developed in 2009 and updated in 2013, CUSD facilities need $822 million in repairs and maintenance. CUSD currently has $44.9 million for facilities.
CUSD has 19 individual funds in six major categories with a Total Balance of $56,701,087
Deferred Maintenance Fund:                             $  2,376,674
Developer Fees: Balance                                     $  6,172,349
Redevelopment Agency Pass-through Funds:
RDA San Juan Capistrano                           $  1,614.759
RDA San Clemente                                     $     344,589
RDA Mission Viejo                                      $  7,900,200     
State Facilities Funds: Balance
SSFF1A OPSC                                           $  1,120,782
SSFF 47 OPSC                                       $  1,030,499
School Facility Improvement District (SFID):      $  4,903,932
Community Facilities District (CFD) Funds:
CFD No. 87-1 –MV/AV                            $10,197,218
CFD No. 88-1 – RSM                                  $     885,824     
CFD No. 90-1 - Cota De Caza                      $  2,015,892     
CFD No. 90_2 IA2002-1 – Talega             $  1,082,518     
CFD No.  90-2 – Talega                          $  5,090,802     
CFD No. 92-1 – Las Flores                          $  6,417,529      
CFD No. 94-1 – RSM II                               $  1,825,563     
CFD No. 98-1A – Pacifica San Juan             $  1,721,241     
CFD No. 98-2 – Ladera                           $  1,969,656     
CFD No. 2004-1 – Rancho Madrina           $       31,060     
CFD No. 2005-1 – Whispering Hills           TBD
Total                                                     $56,701,087
              CFD 87- 1 is ending early                ($10,197,281)                                       
RDA SJC (Funds are spoken for)       ($  1,614,759)
Leaving a fund balance of:                          $44,889 million
CUSD does not have enough funding to bring facilities up to minimum code standards. Where is CUSD going to get funding to bring our facilities up to code?
Source: Capistrano Unified Board Presentation "Facilities Funding Report" dated Nov 6th, 2013 at page 11
New K- 8 School for Rancho Mission Viejo Development
CUSD will need to build a new K- 8 School for Rancho Mission Viejo development that is slated to be open in 2016 and have the capacity to serve between 1,200 and 1,600 students.
Where will that money come from?
The State is no longer matching funds for new construction.
The estimated cost of this new school is $30 million.

Capistrano Unified has $50 million in Unfunded Pension Liabilities
Governor Brown is Lying to Taxpayers

Pension contributions are projected to climb to over 10% of the Districts budget by 2021

While Governor Brown likes to make public proclamations that he is improving funding for all schools - the truth is that the Governors new funding formula intentionally under funds wealthy suburban school districts. So while it is true that CUSD is receiving "more" revenue. The amount is not sufficient to cover new expenses that the Governor is passing down to local school districts.

Governor Brown is forcing Districts to contribute substantially more money to CalSTRS and CalPERS in order to shore up the underfunded pension plans. CUSD pension contribution will increase from its current:
CalPERS:  11.442% to 20.4% by 2021
CalSTRS:   9.50% to 19.1% by 2021
Which will represent 9.6% of CUSD’s total unrestricted budget.

Source: Financial Report- Governor’s 2014-15 Proposed Budget and May Revise Up-date at Page 12 2j
Employee compensation is currently 92.7% of the Districts budget. That means that employee costs will exceed 100% of the District’s budget. CUSD will need to borrow money to offer any student services.

And listen to the Board Audio at: 29:20:
The Affordable Health Care Act will impact the District’s health insurance costs in an amount that is yet unknown.
Cost To Implement Common Core Standards
Full Implementation of CCSS will be in 2014- 2015 (next year).
The State provided CUSD with $10,148,614 in funding for the implementation of the new standards.
2012-2013   $  8,118,891
2013-2014   $  2,029,723
Total            $10,148,614
Source: California Department of Education Common Core State Standards Implementation Funds – see Schedule of 2013- 2014 Final Entitlements
How was the money spent?
  • Professional Development: $5 million (3 days of Common Core Standards Training)
  • Instructional Materials: $500,000 (Bridge Materials Only)
  • Technology - $4 million
Source: Common Core Expenditure Plan for One-Time Funds
CUSD is going to need to purchase new assessments, instructional materials and computers. Recommendations are 1 computer minimum for every 4 students or 13,250 computers. Spending $300 per Chrome book that is $4 million just for computers.
The District will also need more money for professional development, and technology support.
Where is CUSD going to get the funding to adequately implement the CCSS in the next six months?

Source: Pioneer Institute Estimates Cost of Transition to National Education Standards at $16 Billion. http://pioneerinstitute.org/education/study-estimates-cost-of-transition-to-national-education-standards-at-16-billion/
The District has 200 “New Comers” –
The District has received 200 new students who speak little or no English and are from many different Countries. Orange County Department of Education has directed CUSD to put resources towards assimilating these “New Comers”. CUSD gets about $273 per student in extra money for ELL and the poor. Assimilating these students will be a drain on resources and will have a negative effect on every student in the District.
The District is Deficit Spending
2013 – 14    1.3%
2014 – 15    1.9%
2015 – 16    2.6%
Employee Compensation:

Every year employee compensation increases:
Automatic Step & Column Salary increases
COLA increases
Health and Welfare benefit increases.
Employment contracts for 2013- 2014 increased employee compensation by:
CSEA $10,883,750
Teamsters $1,251.373
CUEA $26,886,519
CUMA (not disclosed)
Source: Source documents are contained in my CERTIFIED LETTER dated May 21, 2013 to the Capistrano Unified School District Board of Trustees. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxN84UxJs9MTTldQOXpjUHZzZjg/edit?usp=sharing
CUEA at pages 7-13, CSEA at pages 13-15, Teamsters at pages 16-18, CUMA at page 19

* Note: It should be noted that in negotiation of the Districts Contract with CUEA for 2013-14 all initial proposals stated a ½ year freeze in Step & Column, however when the actual contract was executed there was no freeze in Step & Column. It is unlawful to change a material term of a contract without disclosing that to the public.
The Average compensation for a Teacher is now (2013-14), $105,000 per year (Salaries, Pensions and Benefits)
As employee costs continue to increase, where does CUSD find revenue to pay for these increased costs without continuing to cut student services? In 2013-14 Students saw class sizes increase by 1.5 students across all grades and three instructional furloughs days were used to pay for employee compensation increases.
COSTLY EARLY RETIREMENT PLAN
In 2012-2013 the District budget projected the Ratio of Employee Compensation to General Fund Expenses to be 101% of the Districts Budget climbing to 114% of the General Fund Budget for the subsequent two years.
To bring the ratio down to the current 92.7%, the District implemented an early retirement plan. The cost of the plan was an additional expense of $2.44 million per year for 5 years. The first year was paid for with a class size increase of 1.5 students across all grades. The District did not identify how it would pay for the remaining four years?
* Note: It should be noted that in 2013- 2014 the average compensation (Salaries-Pensions-Benefits) for Certificated Employees increased by $10,000 on average per person.

2012-13 Average Teacher Compensation: $  95,673
2013-14 Average Teacher Compensation: $105,340

A $10,000 average increase in Teacher compensation is outrageous given the fact that CUSD had to increase class sizes by 1.5 students in all grades, and had to use 3 instructional furlough days to balance its budget.

Source: June 27, 2012 Public Disclosure of Collective Bargaining Agreement 2012- 2013
Source: July 24, 2013 Public Disclosure of Collective Bargaining Agreement presented in a Memo from Clark Hampton, Deputy Superintendent, Business and Support Services to Trustees re: USE OF ADDITIONAL FUNDING FROM 2012-2013 TO 2013-2014 AND PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT 2013- 2014 http://capousd.ca.schoolloop.com/file/1343191429797/5667737573387975994.pdf at page 3
CUSD CURRENTLY HAS NO CONTRACT WITH ITS TEACHERS.

The community has a high stake in our public education system. The negotiations between a District and its employee groups greatly influence events in the classroom because they have an impact on the overall cost of education. When local school boards and employee groups meet at the negotiating table, the decisions that are made are of great importance to the quality of education that is provided to students. While negotiations are usually conducted in private meetings between representatives of the school district and its employee groups, Public Disclosure Laws ensure that School Districts provide the Public with an opportunity to participate in the collective bargaining process.
Trustees are elected by the Public to represent the interests of students and the Public in all matters before the Board. Trustees do not represent what is in the best interests of employees. Employees are represented by their bargaining units.
In order for Trustees to fulfill their fiduciary duty to students and the Public, Trustees must consider the Public’s voice when negotiating on behalf of the students. Trustees must provide parents and the public with an opportunity to study contract issues, evaluate their cost and impact on the educational system, and provide the public with an opportunity to be heard.  

The District is currently operating without a Teachers contract for 2014-15. A 2014-15 Budget that was adopted June 25, 2014 which decreased Class Size by 1.5 students in all grades at a cost of $4,950,000 and restored furlough days at a cost of $7,200,00. Class Size and Furlough Days are negotiated items, so how was this done legally without having a new CUEA contract in place?  

Source: June 25, 2014 2014-2015 Proposed Budget
Listen to Board Audio Agenda Item #13 “2014-15 Budget Adoption” at 59 minutes 43 seconds http://cusd.capousd.org/cusdweb/boardaudio/6-25-14/06-25-14RegBdMtg.mp3


The following 2 Documents were released from the District regarding the lack of a current contract:


The document above was approved by 4 Trustees: John Alpay, Lynn Hatton- Hodson, Amy Hanacek and Anna Bryson.

Trustee Jim Reardon released the following Statement:



Checking the Voracity of the District’s Statement:

The Current Contract was for the Period July 1, 2011 - June 30, 2013.


For the Period July 1, 2013 - June 30, 2014 the parties worked under a MOU dated 7-22-14

The MOU increased class sizes by 1.5 students across all grades, suspended District Open House, and reduced the school year to 177 days (3 instructional furlough days). The MOU also provided for Teacher’s to be paid for 183 days of service. 2 non-instructional furlough days. 3 Days of mandatory Common Core Training.


On July 30, 2013 Clark Hampton, Deputy Superintendent, Business and Support Services sent a memo to Trustees explaining the MOU.



With the Passage of the States New LCFF, the District received $8.42 million in new funding. District’s were directed by OCDE not to include these new funds in the current year budget.  However, because there was no LCAP in place to ensure accountability; CUSD passed a 2013- 2014 budget without having any employment contracts in place (over 92% of the budget). Execution of 2013- 2014 employment contracts were intentionally delayed so that new LCFF money could be added to revenues so that the COLA + "New" LCFF moneys could be combined to trigger $5.622 million in salary restorations from the 2010 teachers strike.
By delaying contract negotiations CUSD paid employees $5.622 million in salary restorations then started the process of identifying $13,381 in budget cuts for 2013-2014- our current school year.
The result:
Protected Salaries- Pensions- Benefits- for employees
Cuts to student services- Increased class sizes- cuts to programs- deferred maintenance- 3 instructional furlough days.

This is the 3rd year that CUSD has negotiated behind closed doors to ensure that employee compensation has been protected at the expense of student services.

In 2012- Majority Board Members prevented Minority Board members from making comments on the record when the vote to adopt the budget was taken.

See Internal e-mail from CUSD Fiscal Expert to Orange County Department of Education https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-Ln-e-F9vYh9nRLb6XyR09Fcif5xxm8_niCzXRLlDAI/edit

Listen to Board Audio: June 27, 2012 Board of Trustees Meeting Agenda Items #1, 4, 5  http://cusd.capousd.org/cusdweb/boardaudio/6-27-12/06-27-12RegBdMtg.mp3

See: July 24, 2014 Letter to Superintendent Joseph Farley https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qmGvFrJnMUP4Y3oFX6EiOz7TQzZHieFs2tXy3WLtB2c/edit

The delay in executing the current 2014-15 contract without disclosing an impasse to the public is not surprising given the CUSD’s past behavior.

California Government Code Section 3547- 3547.5 governs the process by which the District and Employee groups are to conduct themselves to ensure Public Disclosure of the Collective Bargaining.

Once the District Contract Openers have been made Public at a Board meeting Section 3547(d) requires that the District make any “new” subjects of meeting and negotiating arising after the presentation of initial proposals be made public within 24 hours.

To date, the District has never notified the Public of an impasse regarding the 2015-16 Contract with CUEA. That fact is intentionally left out of the District’s statement. That is a violation of Education Code Section 3547. The District adopted a budget without knowing the full costs of its employment contracts. That is a violation of Government Code Section 3547.5. Had the parties negotiated in good faith, a 2014-15 CUEA contract would have been in place by June 30, 2014 or an impasse filed and notice of the impasse should have been made public.

The enforcement of Public Disclosure laws takes on special importance during tough economic times when the interests of employee groups are at odds with those of the students. Compliance with Public Disclosure Laws prevent School Districts from entering into employment contracts that unjustly enrich employees at the expense of the quality of education students receive. This is the 3rd year that CUSD has unjustly enriched employees at the expense of student services. Trustees should be prosecuted for breaching their fiduciary duty to taxpayers and students. The Orange County Department of Education, the Superintendent and certain members of District Staff should be charged with a violating California Government and Education codes.  Unfortunately for students, given the power of the Public Employee Unions, no disciplinary action will be taken. Governor Brown, State Attorney General Kamala Harris and State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson will all be re-elected (when they should be recalled for what they have done to CUSD’s 50,000 students). The union backed candidates for the Board of Trustee will be elected because we elect our Trustees by Area which means only those residents who live in Area’s #4, #6 and #7 will have the privilege of deciding who will sit on the Board. If Union backed candidates are elected, the District will continue to cut student services to balance its budget. The only consequences will be to the students in the District who will graduate unable to compete with their peers around the world; and who will not have the opportunity to meet their potential because they have been deprived of their fundamental right to an adequate education.

TEACHER SALARY SCHEDULE
Despite the fact that CUSD has cut $152 million from its budget since 2006- the CUSD teacher salary schedule has only decreased by 1.2%. That was in 2010 as a result of the 2010 Teachers Union strike mediation agreement.
Capistrano Unified Teachers Salaries





Average
No of
P-2
%

Schedule
Service  
ADA
Salary

Salary
Days

Change

Paid
Required


2012-13
78,827
185
48,432
0.00%
2011-12
80,105
182
48,704
0.00%
2010-11
77,508
182
49,354
-1.20%
2009-10
79,784
185
49,889
0.00%
2008-09
76,384
185
50,077
0.00%
2007-08
75,390
185
49,137
3.00%
2006-07
70,974
185
48,713
4.00%
2005-06
67,801
185
48,515
5.00%
2004-05
63,282
185
48,130
0.00%
2003-04
62,622
185
47,458
0.00%
2002-03
61,620
185
46,291
2.00%
2001-02
57,094
185
44,624
0.00%
2000- 01
56,387
185
43,160
13.00%
1999-00
50,346
185
41,871
2.50%
The 1.2% Salary reduction was restored this summer using $5.62 million of the $8.24 million in new LCFF money with no input from parents, students or the Public as required by LCFF LCAP. District’s were specifically told not to include new LCFF money in their budget adoption. $5.62 million was money that could have been used to restore the calendar to 180 days and reduce class sizes.
Source: Memorandum from Clark Hampton, Deputy Superintendent, Business and Support Services re: USE OF ADDITIONAL FUNDING FROM 2012- 2013 to 2013- 2014 AND PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT http://capousd.ca.schoolloop.com/file/1343191429797/5667737573387975994.pdf page 1 and Chart on Page 2
The Cost of Superintendent Contracts Continue to Increase
The District had to offer its latest Superintendent a $305,000 contract to come to CUSD- another increased expense to the District – about $30,000 more per year than the previous Superintendent made.
CUSD has had a revolving door of Superintendents. Each new superintendent comes at a higher cost to the District.
The Continued lack of funding has resulted in a great deal of illegal fundraising and questionable revenue sourcing.
FUNDRAISING
Parents in the District are now fundraising to pay for Teachers Salaries, Class Size Reductions, Programs like Art and Music. PTA and Booster Clubs are paying for Science and Math curriculum. Fundraising now pays for librarians, nurses and instructional aids.
A school district cannot function long term hoping that sufficient funds will be raised through donations to pay for basic student services. While wealthy schools have the ability to fundraise for student services, poor schools in the District do not. The result has been a great inequity in the quality of education that poor students and English Language Learners receive within the District itself.
DONATIONS
The following is just a sample of donations- full list can be found at the links provided- donations for instructional materials are to numerous to list. CUSD is relying on fundraising to pay for basic student services for which the State of California is constitutionally obligated to pay- this is illegal under California Law AB 1575
January 8, 2014      Agenda Item #13
Page 105
Bathgate Elementary Foundation donated $21,000 for Music Teachers Salaries for Bathgate Elementary School.
Moulton Elementary School PTA donated $16,290 for a Reading Intervention Teachers salary for Moulton Elementary School
Page 106
Education for Children donated $10,109.26 for Instructional Materials and Supplies to Las Flores Elementary School
Education for Children donated $11,560.52 for Instructional Materials and Supplies to Las Flores Middle School
Education for Children donated $19,732.37 for Instructional Materials and Supplies to Tesoro High School
Moulton Elementary School PTA donated $12,483 for a Classified Instructional Aid’s salary for Moulton Elementary School
San Juan Elementary School PTA donated $8,200 for a Classified Instructional Aid’s salary for San Juan Elementary School
Page 107
Forester Ranch Education Foundation donated $42,410.00 for *Pali Institute Camp to Truman Benedict Elementary School.
* The Pali Institute is a camp run by a for- profit company engaged in the Entertainment business. The Pali Institute is part of a family of companies under the Pali Entertainment Group umbrella. www.palientertainment.com
Mako Foundation donated $54,000 for Instructional Aids Salaries for Vista Del Mar Elementary School
Education for Children donated $10,284.84 for Instructional Materials and Supplies to Wagon Wheel Elementary School
February 12, 2014 Agenda Item #12
Page 59
City of Aliso Viejo donated $1,000.00 for Certificated Teachers Salaries at Aliso Viejo Middle School
Canyon Vista Elementary School PTA donated $6,750 for Student Supervisors at Canyon Vista Elementary School.
Capistrano Valley High School PTSA donated $2,000 for STAP Stipends
Chaparral Elementary School PTA donated $37,078 for Instructional Materials and Supplies
Ladera Ranch Education Foundation donated $10,000 for Instructional Materials and Supplies
Page 60
*The Leonard Family Foundation donated $235,000 for Instructional materials and Supplies
*NOTE: This is really a donation for Class Size Reduction per previous Board Agendas. The Leonard Family has generously donated $225,000 per year for many years and until 2012-2013 it was always titled as a donation to reduce class size.
See:
2012: March 27, 2012 Agenda Item #21 Page 127 –Instructional Materials and Supplies http://capousd.ca.schoolloop.com/file/1229223560406/1218998864154/7912500800103396038.pdf
2011: March 8, 2011 Agenda Item #7 Page 84 –Class Size Reduction
City of Laguna Niguel $6,500.00 for After School Music Program and Radio Equipment for Niguel Hills Middle School
Page 61
Ladera Ranch Education Foundation donated $10,134 for Orange County Department of Education Training and Instructional Materials and Supplies for Oso Grande Elementary School.
San Clemente High School PTSA donated $6,000 for Instructional Materials and Supplies to San Clemente High School
Various Vista del Mar Elementary School Parents donated $1,000 for Instructional Materials and Supplies to Vista Del Mar Elementary School
Vista del Mar Mako Foundation donated $2,712.96 for Instructional Materials and Supplies to Vista Del Mar Elementary School
February 26, 2014 Agenda Item #10
Source:
Page 285
City of Laguna Niguel donated $5,000 for hourly salaries for After School Programs at Aliso Niguel High School.
Bergeson Foundation donated $22,000 for RSN Aids for 2013-14 for Bergeson Elementary School
City of Laguna Niguel donated $5,000 for hourly salaries for After School Tutorial at Dana Hills High School.
Las Flores Elementary School Boosters donated $14,810 for 5th Grade Outdoor Science School for Las Flores Elementary School.
Page 286
Oso Grande Elementary School PTA donated $22,000 for Meet the Masters and Discovery Science Lessons for Oso Grande Elementary School.
March 12, 2014       Agenda Item #13
Source:
Page 203
Pacific Life Foundation donated $3,000 for Substitute Teachers Salaries and Technology to Aliso Viejo Middle School .
Las Flores Elementary School Booster Club donated $1,036.20 for outdoor Science School Teacher Stipends to Las FLores Elementary.
Assistance League of Capistrano Valley donated $7,000 for Accelerated Reader Program for Marco Forster
Page 204
Moulton Elementary School PTA donated $7,169.02 for a Primary Music Program for Moulton Elementary School.
Forster Ranch Education Foundation donated $1,308 for Outdoor Science School Teacher Stipends to Truman Benedict Elementary School.
March 26, 2014       Agenda Item #17
Source:
Page 53
Arroyo Vista Science Boosters donated $7,050 for Outdoor Science School Tuition, Transportation and Teacher Stipends for Arroyo Vista Elementary School
Bathgate Elementary School Foundation donated $39,800 for Outdoor Science School Tuition , Transportation and Teacher Stipends for Bathgate Elementary School
Capistrano Valley High School PTSA donated $10,000 for Teacher Grants for Capistrano Valley High School.
Concordia Elementary School donated $300 for substitute teachers for Concordia Elementary School.
OC Community Foundation donated $8,000 for Teacher release time for training for the CUSD District music program.
City of Aliso Viejo donated $2,500 for staffing of homework club at Don Juan Avila Middle School.
George White Elementary School PTA donated $25,000 for 5th grade Outside Science School at George White Elementary School
Ladera Ranch Foundation donated $4,300 to Save The Music at Ladera Ranch Elementary School.
Page 54
Laguna Niguel Elementary School Foundation donated $25,000 for an I-Pad Cart for Laguna Niguel Elementary School.
San Clemente High School PTSA donated $3,770 for SchoolLoop 2013-14 for San Clemente High
Pacific Life donated $3,000 for Common Core Standards Professional Development for San Clemente High School.
Tesoro High School PTSA donated $1,298.71 for Teacher Grants for Tesoro High School.

Forster Ranch Education Foundation donated $12,000 for SMART Boards for Kindergarten Class rooms at Truman Benedict.
Revenues From The Misuse of Mello Roos
CUSD has engaged is some questionable practices regarding its Mello Roos Districts. CUSD has been using these special taxes as an income stream for general fund purposes by generating substantially more revenue than is necessary to pay the bond obligations. Upon threat of lawsuits from residents- the District has reluctantly voted to end this practice further reducing local revenues to CUSD.
The District has been generating revenue streams from facilities funds. Revenues for 2013-2014 were $13,621,000. Revenues from facilities funds are projected to decline to $7,647,000 which means that CUSD will have less revenue generated each year than previously anticipated for facilities. CUSD may have to reduce potential revenues even farther; and may have to repay residents for any excess taxes collected beyond what was needed to service the bond.
Deferred Maintenance Fund:                             $1,000,000
Developer Fees: Balance                                     $   900,000
Redevelopment Agency Pass-through Funds:
RDA San Juan Capistrano                          $   460,000
RDA San Clemente                                     $     48,000
              RDA Mission Viejo $1,700,000       
State Facilities Funds: Balance
SSFF1A OPSC                                            $       5,000
SSFF 47 OPSC                                            $       6,000
School Facility Improvement District (SFID) Fund: $      20,000
Community Facilities District (CFD) Funds:
CFD No. 87-1 –MV/AV                            $3,833,000
CFD No. 88-1 – RSM                                           ( $     62,000)       
CFD No. 90-1 - Cota De Caza                      $     42,000       
CFD No. 90_2 IA2002-1 – Talega             $   300,000       
CFD No.  90-2 – Talega                          $1,073,000       
CFD No. 92-1 – Las Flores                                $   310,000       
CFD No. 94-1 – RSM II                               $1,681,000       
CFD No. 98-1A – Pacifica San Juan              $   337,000       
CFD No. 98-2 – Ladera                           $1,692,000       
CFD No. 2004-1 – Rancho Madrina           $   276,000       
CFD No. 2005-1 – Whispering Hills           TBD  
Total                                                     $13,621,000
CFD 87- 1 is ending early                        ($3,833,000)
RDA SJC (Funds are spoken for)                       ($   460,000)
94-1 ends 2014                                            ($1,681,000)
Revenue Generation:                                          $ 7,647,000
Source: Facilities Funding Report November 6, 2013 http://capousd.ca.schoolloop.com/file/1229223560406/1218998864154/7695162819501468512.pdf at page 13
Source: May 22, 2013 Board Meeting Exhibit 2: CFD Refinancing Report: http://capousd.ca.schoolloop.com/file/1229223560406/1218998864154/5665548576433686348.pdf
Source: August 14, 2013 Board Meeting http://capousd.ca.schoolloop.com/file/1229223560406/1218998864154/7603813809991434121.pdf Agenda Items #5, 6, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28
Community Facilities District Annual Administration Reports for the Capistrano Unified School District Fiscal year 2013-2014:
Exhibit 6: CFD No. 92-1
Exhibit 20: CFD No. 87-1
Exhibit 21: CFD No. 88-1
Exhibit 23: CFD No.  90-2
Exhibit 24: CFD No. 94-1
Exhibit 25: CFD No. 98-1A
Exhibit 26: CFD No. 98-2
Exhibit 27: CFD No. 2004-1
Exhibit 28: CFD No. 2005-1
March 26, 2014 letter to Governor Brown at Page 18
Rental Revenue from CUSD Administration Building.
The District also engaged in the questionable practice of using Mello Roos taxes inequitably to fund the construction of a state of the art administration building. Rental income from the District Administration building has been transferred to the general fund and was used to pay salaries, pensions and benefits of District employees rather than remain in the facilities budget for building maintenance and Capital Improvements.
March 26, 2014 letter to Governor Brown at Page 19
The LCFF Base Grant is Insufficient to provide any CUSD student with an Adequate Education and is therefore unconstitutional as a matter of law
The facts stated above establish that the Capistrano Unified School District is not receiving enough funding from the State of California to provide any student in the district with an adequate education. An “adequate” education system is defined as an educational system that provides all students with access to instructional programs and services consistent with the California content standards in all subject areas, including core subjects, visual and performance arts, and physical education.
It’s unfortunate that California student’s have to sue the State of California to force the Legislature to carry out its constitutional obligations.
Unfortunately the State of California’s legal system is no longer a viable venue for the adjudication of student rights issues. The power of public employee unions like the CTA, and its influence on State Legislators and activist Judges have resulted in long legal battles that are not resolved until long after the Plaintiffs have graduated from the very schools that they are seeking to remedy.
The latest example is the recent victory for students in Vergara v. California regarding teacher tenure. Rather than let the decision stand (a victory for students); Governor Brown, State Superintendent of Public Education Tom Torlakson and State Attorney General Kamala Harris have decided to use taxpayer money to appeal a ruling that benefits students. The only rational basis for appealing Vigara is to repay the CTA, which has pumped millions into making sure that these three individuals are re-elected to office - even if that means trampling on students constitutional right to a FREE public education as set forth in Article IX of the California Constitution and the State’s Education Code. The effort to overturn the Vergara ruling illustrates the fact that that the State of California, and its powerful public employee unions continue to deplete valuable resources from taxpayers to help powerful public employee unions protect adult jobs at the expense of student services, causing irreparable harm to students. Every furlough day, every missed instructional minute, every oversized classroom is a dagger in the future of every student in California’s public education system and will have a lasting effect on each individual student for a lifetime.
It is unconscionable that a handful of corrupt legislators can continue to deprive students of an opportunity to acquire the basic minimal skills necessary for the enjoyment of the rights of speech and of full participation in the political process by depriving them of adequate education.
It is indefensible for those same corrupt individuals to be allowed to misappropriate public funds that were constitutionally mandated to be spent to provide a FREE and adequate education for every student in California; to be allowed to spend constitutionally mandated money for vanity projects such as High Speed Rail, Drivers Licenses for illegal immigrants (which does not benefit a single legal resident), and to repay the omnificent CTA with a 14th year of Public Education, which will dilute per pupil spending even further. Most egregiously of all, to use money mandated to educate students to to appeal the Vigara ruling.
Given the fact that there is only one viable political party in California, and given the power that public employee Unions have in the governance of this State, the only viable and timely remedy for CUSD students is to file a lawsuit in Federal Court.

While the Federal Constitution does not explicitly recognize education as a Constitutional Right, the Supreme Court does recognize that there are times when the Federal Government must step in and see that the laws that a State has chosen to enact are implemented in a manner that provides every person with equal treatment under those laws.

The Federal Government has a Substantial Interest in Student outcomes in California
California education is critical to the entire nation’s future because more than one in eight public school students in the U.S. attends school in California.

According to the latest data available from NCES:
California had 6.3 million preK-12 students in 2011, and that is projected to increase to almost 7 million by 2023.


54.1% percent were eligible for free/reduced lunch and

Source: http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d13/tables/dt13_204.10.asp

23.2 percent were in English Language Learner programs


California’s failure to educate its students will greatly impact how educated the Nation is as a whole; and how well prepared the Nation will be for jobs in the 21 century.

California’s new Local Control Funding Formula allocates funds based solely on wealth, race and ethnicity. There would be no constitutional issue if the States Base Funding Grant was sufficient to provide an adequate education to every student in the State. However, California’s new funding system by design discriminates against all students living in wealthy suburban school districts, and therefore the law is in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution which prevents discrimination based on suspect classifications such as wealth, race and ethnicity.
The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees every citizen equal protection under the law and gives Federal Courts jurisdiction to review State laws that discriminate against an individual because of wealth, race or ethnicity using strict judicial scrutiny.
The landmark US Supreme Court case San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriquez, defined when it would be appropriate for a Federal Court to review an individual State’s Education Funding System to determine the constitutionality of that system.
What the Court Held:
1) A Federal Court has proper jurisdiction to review an individual State’s Education funding laws under standards of strict judicial scrutiny, in cases involving laws that operate to the disadvantage of suspect classes or interfere with the exercise of fundamental rights and liberties explicitly or implicitly protected by the Constitution.
Source: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/411/1/ at Pp. 411 U. S. 18-44.
a) California’s Local Control Funding Formula Law operates to the disadvantage of a suspect class.
The California system discriminates against a large, diverse, and amorphous class, unified only by the common factor of residence in districts that happen to have greater taxable income with a lower percentage of students that are English language learners or are from low-income families.
  • Wealth is a “suspect classification”
  • Race is a “suspect classification”
  • National origin is a “suspect classification”
Source: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/411/1/ at Pp. 411 U. S. 18-28
The California System discriminates against a definable class of people: all students that live in wealthy suburban school Districts defined as Districts that have a higher per capita average income and a low percentage of English Language Learners and/or students from low-income families.
CUSD Funding Under the LCFF 2012-13
Base Grant: $ 6,500 per student (equal for every student in the State).
Supplemental Grant: $273.00

Additional funding that is based on the percentage of students in the District that are English Language Learners, Receiving Free and Reduced Lunch, or are in Foster Care.
English Language Learners in CUSD
10% of all Students in CUSD are English Language Learners. 81.7% of English Language Learners are socioeconomically disadvantaged:
Asian: 279 or 5.3%
Black or African American: 15 or .37%
Hispanic: 4,466 or 85%
White not Hispanic: 150 or 2.9%
Special Education: 15.6% or 816
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged: 4,265 or 81.7%
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Students
24.1% (12,793 students) are Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Students
Concentration Grant: -0-

Additional money for Districts that have targeted students exceeding 55% of the student population. Targeted students are: English Language Learners, receiving Free and Reduced Lunch, or are in Foster Care.
CUSD % English Language Learners 10%
CUSD % Socioeconomically Disadvantaged: 24.1%
< than 55% so CUSD does not qualify for any Concentration Grant funds.
California’s Local Control Funding Formula is unconstitutional on its face because the Base Funding Grant is set so low, that as a matter of law the only school districts in California that can attain a level of funding that is “adequate” are Basic Aid Districts and Districts that have over 55% of their student population that are English Language Learners and/or are socioeconomically disadvantaged.
It should also be noted that every child in a Basic Aid District or a District with a high percentage of ELL and poor will be adequately funded irrespective of their personal income, just as every child in the Capistrano Unified School District will be underfunded irrespective of their personal income.
In Rodriguez the Court specifically stated a law would be determined to Discriminate on the basis of wealth if all students who, irrespective of their personal incomes, happen to reside in a relatively poor (or in this case, a relatively wealthy District).
b) California’s Local Control Funding Formula Law interferes with the exercise of fundamental rights and liberties explicitly or implicitly protected by the Constitution.
 
The California LCFF impermissibly interferes with the "fundamental" right that every child living within the Capistrano Unified School District boundary has to a FREE and “Adequate” public education. Education is one of the most important services performed by the State. Although Education is not within the limited category of rights recognized by Federal Courts Court as guaranteed by the US Constitution, the Supreme Court has held that once a state decides to provide an education to its children, as California has (Article IX of the California Constitution), the provision of such education must be consistent with other federally guaranteed constitutional rights, such as the Fourteenth Amendment's right to equal protection under the law.
Rodriquez Decision “In Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U. S. 483 (1954), a unanimous Court recognized that "education is perhaps the most important function of state and local governments." Id. at 347 U. S. 493. What was said there in the context of racial discrimination has lost none of its vitality with the passage of time:
"Compulsory school attendance laws and the great expenditures for education both demonstrate our
Page 411 U. S. 30
recognition of the importance of education to our democratic society. It is required in the performance of our most basic public responsibilities, even service in the armed forces. It is the very foundation of good citizenship. Today it is a principal instrument in awakening the child to cultural values, in preparing him for later professional training, and in helping him to adjust normally to his environment. In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education. Such an opportunity, where the state has undertaken to provide it, is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms."
To be constitutional, within the Supreme Court’s ruling in Rodriguez, the State must increase the Base Grant to an amount that will provide every student in the State with an adequate education or be overturned as a violation of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution.

The constitutional standard under the Equal Protection Clause is whether the challenged Funding System bears a rational relationship to a legitimate state purpose.
The Court in Rodriguez found that while the Texas funding system was not perfect, the system provided a basic education for every child in the State; and it also allowed and encouraged local control over how local tax dollars were to be spent.
Pp. 411 U. S. 44-53
Unlike the Texas system, California’s tax system is structured such that the California Legislature determines the amount of property taxes used to fund schools. Local school boards do not have authority to raise any revenue for district instructional programs; and as such, individual school districts do not in fact have “local control”.
Despite it’s title- there is no real “local control” or the ability for Districts within the State of California to provide additional funding to their District without voting to tax themselves twice for the service that the State is already constitutionally obligated to provide.
California’s Local Control funding formula does not provide an adequate education to all students. The formula is intentionally designed to underfund wealthy suburban Districts assuming that they have the means to tax themselves twice to get to a level of funding that is sufficient to provide an adequate education for every student.
This has lead to CUSD resorting to relying on illegal fundraising and other dishonest means of bringing in additional revenue resulting in large discrepancies in the quality of education children within the District receive. Wealthy schools can buy extra teachers and aids to reduce class sizes. Wealthy schools can buy programs and curriculum such as art, music, science and math. Poor schools simply go without. So the poor and ELL in CUSD are the most under-educated students in the State of California. They have been deprived of opportunities that the poor and ELL in other Districts are given, simply because they happen to live in a wealthy suburban school district.
The State of California has the highest tax revenue in its history. The State has the money to raise the Base Funding Grant to an amount that would provide an adequate education for every child. However, California’s Governor and its legislature have made the conscious decision to deprive students in CUSD of an adequate education and to use that money for other things.
Before the Governor is permitted to spend any tax revenue on High Speed Rail, Programs for people who are not in this country legally, to reward the CTA with a 14th year of Public education and to appeal the Vigara case; the State of California must first use tax revenue to provide an adequate education for every child as mandated by the Article IX of the California Constitution.
The formula creates inequities that are not rational and do not fulfill the State’s goal of providing an adequate education to every student.
Every child in a Basic Aid District or a District with a high percentage of ELL and poor will be adequately funded irrespective of their personal income, just as every child in the Capistrano Unified School District will be underfunded irrespective of their personal income.
If the stated goal of the Local Control Funding Formula is to provide a base level of funding that will provide every student with an adequate education, and then to provide additional funding to students who have high needs such as ELL and socioeconomically disadvantaged- the system fails to achieve that. ELL and poor students in CUSD are provided with less opportunity then the poor children or ELL in a Basic Aid District or a District with a high percentage of ELL simply because of where they happen to live.
For this reason, California’s Local Control Funding Formula violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

The Local Control Funding Formula law is irrational because the quality of education depended on the wealth of the community you happen to live in and because it creates a huge disparity in per pupil spending based on wealth, race and national origin. For example- The highest Per pupil funding is New Jerusalem Elementary at $177,829 per pupil while Johnstonville Elementary per pupil spending is $6,244 per pupil.

Source: http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/fd/ec/currentexpense.asp