By Jessica Vocca, Superintendent, Cottonwood-Oak Creek School District |
This November, Arizona voters will consider several education-related measures that could significantly impact public schools across our state. While each proposal is intended to address a specific aspect of education policy, together they raise important questions about how Arizona funds public education and who makes decisions about serving students. As superintendent, I believe our community deserves clear, factual information about these measures and how they may affect students, families, staff, and rural school districts like Cottonwood-Oak Creek. The 60% Instructional Spending Requirement-Proposition 320 Perhaps the most significant education proposal is the measure requiring certain school districts to spend at least 60% of their operational budgets on "direct instructional expenses," as defined by the Arizona Auditor General. Districts that do not meet the requirement would be required to increase instructional spending over time and could face financial penalties if they fail to comply. At first glance, the proposal sounds straightforward: spend more money in classrooms. Cottonwood-Oak Creek School District would not be impacted by this ballot measure because it impacts districts with more than 7,500 students or in counties with a population greater than 500,000. Therefore, this will not impact any school districts in Yavapai County. At first glance, the proposal appears to increase spending on classroom instruction. The challenge is that Arizona has ranked near the bottom nationally in K-12 education funding for many years. Public schools have learned to stretch limited resources while continuing to provide safe schools, transportation, counseling, special education services, school nurses, technology support, and well-maintained campuses. One question raised during public discussion of the measure is how the 60% threshold was determined. Arizona school districts currently average about 52% of operational spending on instruction under the Auditor General's definition. The ballot measure establishes a 60% threshold for direct instructional spending. Legislative materials describe the requirement but do not identify a specific research study supporting that percentage as a benchmark for student achievement. What Counts...and What Doesn't Understanding this proposal requires understanding what Arizona considers "instruction. Many people assume every employee who supports students counts toward instructional spending. That is not the case. The Auditor General's definition generally includes classroom teachers, instructional aides, substitute teachers, instructional supplies, athletics, co-curricular activities, field trips, and tuition. However, many professionals who directly contribute to student success are excluded from that calculation, including: • School counselors • School nurses • Social workers • Speech pathologists • Audiologists • Librarians • Literacy coaches • Curriculum specialists • Technology staff • Special education administrators Operational staff are also excluded, including: • Principals • Superintendents • Payroll and business office staff • Custodians • Maintenance personnel • Security staff • Transportation support Yet these individuals are essential to creating schools where students can learn safely, receive support, and succeed. Public Schools Are Comprehensive Systems This highlights an important distinction in the education funding conversation. Public schools do much more than provide classroom instruction. Public school districts serve all enrolled students, including those with disabilities, English learners, and students from a wide range of educational and socioeconomic backgrounds. In addition to classroom instruction, public schools provide transportation, special education, school nurses, counseling, mental health support, technology, libraries, athletics, food service, school safety, and career and technical education. They also maintain buildings, buses, playgrounds, and infrastructure while meeting extensive state and federal requirements. Many of these responsibilities create fixed operating costs. Whether a school serves 500 students or 490 students, the building still needs to be heated and cooled. Bus routes still run. The campus still requires a principal, custodians, maintenance staff, technology support, and safety personnel. Students still need counselors, nurses, and specialized services. Why This Matters for Rural Schools This reality is especially important for rural districts. Unlike larger urban districts, rural schools often operate with lean staffing, and many employees serve multiple roles. One counselor may support an entire campus. Technology staff may serve multiple schools. Maintenance, transportation, and business office personnel already operate efficiently while meeting the same legal requirements as much larger districts. When funding becomes more restrictive, rural districts have fewer options. If spending must be shifted into one narrowly defined category, Districts may need to evaluate how to meet the required spending ratio while continuing to provide other educational and operational services. Depending on each district's circumstances, that could affect counseling services, instructional coaching, technology support, facility maintenance, or other student support programs. Local Decisions Matter Every Arizona community has different needs. A growing suburban district faces different challenges than a small rural district. That is why locally elected governing boards work with district leadership to develop budgets that reflect the priorities of their own communities. Some districts may need to invest in aging facilities. Others may need additional counselors, reading specialists, safety improvements, or classroom teachers. Arizona law assigns locally elected governing boards responsibility for adopting district budgets based on local priorities and state requirements. ESA Reform and Why It Matters- Proposition 212 Another education issue voters may see this November involves Arizona's Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) program. The proposed reform would return ESA eligibility primarily to families meeting certain income requirements while continuing eligibility for many students who qualified under the original ESA program, including students with disabilities, military families, foster children, and students assigned to low-performing schools. The discussion surrounding ESAs is fundamentally about how Arizona distributes education funding. Public schools receive funding based largely on student enrollment. When students leave a district to participate in an ESA, a portion of the funding associated with that student also leaves. However, many of the district's operating costs remain unchanged. This funding model can present unique planning considerations for rural districts because many operational costs remain fixed even when enrollment changes. A district cannot eliminate a fraction of a bus route, part of a school building, or half of a counselor simply because a few students leave. Public schools continue operating comprehensive educational systems for every student who remains enrolled. Supporters of ESA reform believe the program should once again focus on students with the greatest need while managing state education spending. Opponents believe educational choice should remain available to every Arizona family regardless of income. Ultimately, voters will decide which approach they believe best serves Arizona students. Questions Worth Considering As you evaluate these measures, consider several important questions: • How does Arizona define "direct instructional expenses" for purposes of this measure? • How might this proposal affect different types of school districts? • How should Arizona balance local budget flexibility with statewide spending requirements? •. How should Arizona balance educational choice with funding for public schools? An Informed Community Matters Arizona's educators and families share the same goal: helping every child succeed. As Election Day approaches, I encourage everyone to read the ballot language, ask questions, and seek information from multiple reliable sources. An informed community is essential to ensuring that decisions made at the ballot box reflect a full understanding of how public education serves students, families, and communities every day. |