Amendment 39 - School Improvement Republican Style

On the surface, Amendment 39 sounds like a great idea aside from its blatant attempt to write what should be statutory into the Constitution. According to Amendment 39, 65% of all public education funds would be spent on "specific items", code for in the classroom. There is a similar measure called Referendum J that would mandate a similar percentage but would not be constitutional nor would it be the absolute mandate for school districts Amendment 39 is.

If Amendment 39 is such a great idea, why does every teacher I know, including my partner, oppose it? Quite frankly because it would mandate how school spending is spent regardless of the situation with in the district. Amendment 39 includes only the following items in its 65% solution:

Teachers, Classroom Aides and Tutors
Libraries and Librarians
Books and Instructional Material
Classroom Computers
Field Trips, Athletics, Arts and Music

Glad to see they're not going to limit the football team.

This list omits a few key players such as principals, support staff (includes school nurses, food service, guidance counselors and bus drivers), support services such as student testing, college placement, health and medical services, food services and transportation. Also included are the school boards, building construction and maintenance and central administrative functions.

In short, we're supposed to support the schools on 35% of the school budget. The problem is not the need to save in administrative areas, it's the areas that will need to be cut to meet the standard. For example, if a district isn't spending the required amount in the classroom, food service could be cut. That's school breakfasts and lunches. My partner will tell you quickly, you can't teach a hungry child. Transportation, likewise. You can't teach them if you can't get them to school.

This is an ill conceived measure designed to fool people into thinking they're doing something good for schools. It completely denies the fact that administrative costs may be necessary, as may be services such as hot lunches and medical care. It will impact exactly those who need education most, the poor in rich districts and everyone in less rich ones. This one is a definite no but if you do have to vote yes on this, vote yes on Referendum J as well. Better yet, vote no on both and keep schools under local control.