California Black Media

Gov. Newsom and Advocates at Impasse Over Funding for Black Students Education

Last week, at the invitation of the Black in School Coalition (BISC), over 2,500 K-12 students, parents, education advocates, and civil rights leaders marched to the California State Capitol to demand increased funding for Black students in the state’s public schools. BISC is a statewide advocacy association consisting of 17 organizations from all parts of the education community, including teachers, administrators, local school districts and county board of education trustees, parents, civil rights, and faith groups.

Published

2 years ago

April 28, 2023

Oakland Post

Third-grade student Solomon D. Reedus, from Fortune School, participated in the activities at the State Capitol along with his classmates on April 11. Critics say Gov. Gavin Newsom’s budget proposal falls short of narrowing the academic achievement gap between Black students and other groups on state achievement tests. CBM photo by Antonio Ray Harvey.

Joe W. Bowers Jr. | California Black Media

BISC is a statewide advocacy association consisting of 17 organizations from all parts of the education community, including teachers, administrators, local school districts and county board of education trustees, parents, civil rights, and faith groups.

The BISC marchers were calling on Gov. Gavin Newsom and the California Legislature to not move forward with the “Equity Multiplier” proposed in the governor’s Education Budget, which is supposed to be a substitute for Assembly Bill (AB) 2774 authored by Assemblymember Akilah Weber (D – La Mesa).

AB 2774 would have guaranteed funding for California’s lowest performing group, Black students, but advocates say, Newsom’s proposal falls short of that goal.

Because Newsom raised concerns that targeting funds to a specific group of students would violate Prop 209, which prevents preferential treatment based on race, Weber withdrew AB 2774. In exchange, Newsom agreed to increase funding for Black students under the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) in the 2023 budget.

The LCFF is a state law that provides funding to local school districts based on the needs of their students. California’s highest-needs student populations receiving supplemental funding for additional support are English Language Learners, low-income students, and children in foster care or homeless youth. However, despite chronic underperformance, Black students are not identified as a high-needs population for funding.

According to state data, in the 2021-22 academic year, 30% of California’s Black students met English standards and 15% met math standards, compared to 61% and 48% of White students meeting reading and math standards, respectively.

The equity multiplier proposal provides $300 million in ongoing Proposition 98 funding to the LCFF to accelerate gains in closing opportunity and outcome gaps. The funds are allocated to school districts with schools serving high concentrations of students eligible for free meals.

The equity multiplier is part of Newsom’s plan to overhaul how the state can hold districts and schools accountable for student performance, with particular attention to racial disparities. According to Newsom’s office, 95% of Black students in California will be impacted because they are enrolled in districts potentially facing new accountability requirements due to low performance.

Dr. Margaret Fortune, president and CEO of the charter school organization Fortune School of Education and the lead voice for BISC says Newsom’s proposal sounds good but does not reflect the intentions of Weber’s bill.

According to an analysis conducted by EdSource, the funding from Newsom’s proposal would benefit about 6% of Black students statewide and they would be receiving an estimated $18 million out of $300 million proposed. Overall, the proposal targets just 5% of students in the state in about 800 schools and the students reached in those schools are mostly Latino.

To address this disparity in funding for Black students not in low-income schools, BISC has developed an alternative plan to the Equity Multiplier. It proposes additional funding for any group not already funded that scores below the state average on any two metrics on the California School Dashboard. Based on this year’s dashboard results, Black and Native American students would qualify.

Because students who have received LCFF funding have shown progress and improved outcomes due to concentrated resources aimed at their improvement, BISC’s funding alternative intentionally provides Black students the additional support that has benefited high-needs student groups.

Prior to their march on the Capitol, members of the BISC and students provided public comments at the State Assembly’s education budget committee hearing in support of their alternative budget proposal.

Fortune suggested to the committee that the $300 million in the governor’s equity multiplier proposal be directed to student groups who perform below the state average on two or more state indicators on the California school dashboard. This would increase per-student funding from $713 under the governor’s proposal to $3,318 for students in California with the greatest academic needs.

Under the BISC alternative plan, an additional 81,617 Black students and 8,807 Native American students would be eligible for this funding, compared to an additional 22,699 Black students and 1,806 Native American students under Newsom’s proposal.

Christina Laster, Western Regional Education Director of the National Action Network, stated that not many Black students attend the low-income schools targeted by the governor’s equity multiplier. Instead, she recommends focusing on student groups who perform below the state average on two or more state indicators on the California school dashboard. This would target student groups in the most academic need based on their performance, not their race.

Dr. Ramona Bishop, CEO of ELITE Public Schools, urged the Legislators to consider the BISC alternative proposal for the equity multiplier, which would address the needs of the students who stood behind her as she spoke. She emphasized that all Black students in the state deserve care, attention, and the best efforts of those in power.

Izzy Gardon, a spokesperson for the governor said, “We share the ultimate goal of the Black in School Coalition to eliminate opportunity and achievement gaps for Black students. However, we continue to believe that our more comprehensive and legally sound proposal is a better option than AB 2774 and its related alternative proposal. We are not alone in that belief — as I believe you have seen, we have the support of members of the CLBC (California Black Legislative Caucus including Weber), CAAASA (California Association of African American Superintendents), the Superintendent of Public Instruction (Tony Thurmond) and many others.”

So BISC and Newsom are at an impasse at what is the best way to direct state funding for educating Black students in the public schools.

BISC wants funding targeting Black students based on their need for support due to poor academic performance, while Newsom’s Equity Multiplier focuses on schools with high concentrations of poverty, impacting about 6% of the state’s Black students.

Newsom is concerned about the legal implications of funding aimed at specific racial groups and aims to reform the LCFF to address underperforming racial groups. BISC, on the other hand, is focused solely on Black student funding and not on reforming LCFF.

But the California Department of Justice (DOJ) in a preliminary report it wrote for the Task Force to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African Americans recommended funding Black students through the state’s funding formula, suggesting that Newsom should not be so concerned about violating Prop 209.

A recent report from the Legislative Analyst’s Office complicates the debate by noting that high-poverty schools already receive targeted funding and recommending that the Legislature not approve funding for the Equity Multiplier.

Until a solution to the impasse is achieved, the state must persist in its efforts to identify and implement the appropriate policy to assist its Black students in improving their academic performance, based on their individual needs rather than their race.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

California Black Media Political Playback: Black Candidates Are Queuing Up for Intense Political Battles Ahead

Don't Miss

Action Required: Medi-Cal Renewal Process Is Underway Across California

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Activism

Gov. Newsom Approves $170 Million to Fast Track Wildfire Resilience

AB 100 approves major investments in regional conservancies across the state, including over $30 million each for the Sierra Nevada, Santa Monica Mountains, State Coastal, and San Gabriel/Lower LA Rivers and Mountains conservancies. An additional $10 million will support wildfire response and resilience efforts.

Published

2 days ago

April 28, 2025

Oakland Post

Courtesy of California Governor Gavin Newsom’s Facebook page.

By Bo Tefu
California Black Media

With wildfire season approaching, last week Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill (AB) 100, unlocking $170 million to fast-track wildfire prevention and forest management projects — many of which directly protect communities of color, who are often hardest hit by climate-driven disasters.

“With this latest round of funding, we’re continuing to increase the speed and size of forest and vegetation management essential to protecting communities,” said Newsom when he announced the funding on April 14.

“We are leaving no stone unturned — including cutting red tape — in our mission to ensure our neighborhoods are protected from destructive wildfires,” he said.

Newsom also signed an executive order suspending certain regulations to allow urgent work to move forward faster.

This funding builds on California’s broader Wildfire and Forest Resilience Action Plan, a $2.7 billion effort to reduce fuel loads, increase prescribed burning, and harden communities. The state has also launched new dashboards to keep the public informed and hold agencies accountable.

California has also committed to continue investing $200 million annually through 2028 to expand this effort, ensuring long-term resilience, particularly in vulnerable communities.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

California Rideshare Drivers and Supporters Step Up Push to Unionize

Today in California, over 600,000 rideshare drivers want the ability to form or join unions for the sole purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid and protection. It’s a right, and recently at the State Capitol, a large number of people, including some rideshare drivers and others working in the gig economy, reaffirmed that they want to exercise it.

Published

2 days ago

April 28, 2025

Oakland Post

Shutterstock

By Antonio‌ ‌Ray‌ ‌Harvey‌
California‌ ‌Black‌ ‌Media‌

On July 5, 1935, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed into federal law the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). Also known as the “Wagner Act,” the law paved the way for employees to have “the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations,” and “to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, according to the legislation’s language.

On April 8, the rideshare drivers held a rally with lawmakers to garner support for Assembly Bill (AB) 1340, the “Transportation Network Company Drivers (TNC) Labor Relations Act.”

Authored by Assemblymembers Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland) and Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park), AB 1340 would allow drivers to create a union and negotiate contracts with industry leaders like Uber and Lyft.

“All work has dignity, and every worker deserves a voice — especially in these uncertain times,” Wicks said at the rally. “AB 1340 empowers drivers with the choice to join a union and negotiate for better wages, benefits, and protections. When workers stand together, they are one of the most powerful forces for justice in California.”

Wicks and Berman were joined by three members of the California Legislative Black Caucus (CLBC): Assemblymembers Tina McKinnor (D-Inglewood), Sade Elhawary (D-Los Angeles), and Isaac Bryan (D-Ladera Heights).

Yvonne Wheeler, president of the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor; April Verrett, President of Service Employees International Union (SEIU); Tia Orr, Executive Director of SEIU; and a host of others participated in the demonstration on the grounds of the state capitol.

“This is not a gig. This is your life. This is your job,” Bryan said at the rally. “When we organize and fight for our collective needs, it pulls from the people who have so much that they don’t know what to do with it and puts it in the hands of people who are struggling every single day.”

Existing law, the “Protect App-Based Drivers and Services Act,” created by Proposition (Prop) 22, a ballot initiative, categorizes app-based drivers for companies such as Uber and Lyft as independent contractors.

Prop 22 was approved by voters in the November 2020 statewide general election. Since then, Prop 22 has been in court facing challenges from groups trying to overturn it.

However, last July, Prop 22 was upheld by the California Supreme Court last July.

In a 2024, statement after the ruling, Lyft stated that 80% of the rideshare drivers they surveyed acknowledged that Prop 22 “was good for them” and “median hourly earnings of drivers on the Lyft platform in California were 22% higher in 2023 than in 2019.”

Wicks and Berman crafted AB 1340 to circumvent Prop 22.

“With AB 1340, we are putting power in the hands of hundreds of thousands of workers to raise the bar in their industry and create a model for an equitable and innovative partnership in the tech sector,” Berman said.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

California Holds the Line on DEI as Trump Administration Threatens School Funding

The conflict began on Feb. 14, when Craig Trainor, acting assistant secretary for civil rights at the U.S. Department of Education (DOE), issued a “Dear Colleague” letter warning that DEI-related programs in public schools could violate federal civil rights law. The letter, which cited Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and the 2023 Supreme Court ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, which ended race-conscious admissions, ordered schools to eliminate race-based considerations in areas such as admissions, scholarships, hiring, discipline, and student programming.

Published

2 days ago

April 28, 2025

Oakland Post

Shutterstock

By Joe W. Bowers Jr
California Black Media

California education leaders are pushing back against the Trump administration’s directive to dismantle diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs in its K-12 public schools — despite threats to take away billions in federal funding.

The conflict began on Feb. 14, when Craig Trainor, acting assistant secretary for civil rights at the U.S. Department of Education (DOE), issued a “Dear Colleague” letter warning that DEI-related programs in public schools could violate federal civil rights law. The letter, which cited Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and the 2023 Supreme Court ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, which ended race-conscious admissions, ordered schools to eliminate race-based considerations in areas such as admissions, scholarships, hiring, discipline, and student programming.

According to Trainor, “DEI programs discriminate against one group of Americans to favor another.”

On April 3, the DOE escalated the pressure, sending a follow-up letter to states demanding that every local educational agency (LEA) certify — within 10 business days — that they were not using federal funds to support “illegal DEI.” The certification requirement, tied to continued federal aid, raised the stakes for California, which receives more than $16 billion annually in federal education funding.

So far, California has refused to comply with the DOE order.

“There is nothing in state or federal law that outlaws the broad concepts of ‘diversity,’ ‘equity,’ or ‘inclusion,’” wrote David Schapira, California’s Chief Deputy Superintendent of Public Instruction, in an April 4 letter to superintendents and charter school administrators. Schapira noted that all of California’s more than 1,000 traditional public school districts submit Title VI compliance assurances annually and are subject to regular oversight by the state and the federal government.

In a formal response to the DOE on April 11, the California Department of Education, the State Board of Education, and State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond collectively rejected the certification demand, calling it vague, legally unsupported, and procedurally improper.

“California and its nearly 2,000 LEAs (including traditional public schools and charter schools) have already provided the requisite guarantee that its programs and services are, and will be, in compliance with Title VI and its implementing regulation,” the letter says.

Thurmond added in a statement, “Today, California affirmed existing and continued compliance with federal laws while we stay the course to move the needle for all students. As our responses to the United States Department of Education state and as the plain text of state and federal laws affirm, there is nothing unlawful about broad core values such as diversity, equity and inclusion. I am proud of our students, educators and school communities who continue to focus on teaching and learning, despite federal actions intended to distract and disrupt.”

California officials say that the federal government cannot change existing civil rights enforcement standards without going through formal rule-making procedures, which require public notice and comment.

Other states are taking a similar approach. In a letter to the DOE, Daniel Morton-Bentley, deputy commissioner and counsel for the New York State Education Department, wrote, “We understand that the current administration seeks to censor anything it deems ‘diversity, equity & inclusion.’ But there are no federal or State laws prohibiting the principles of DEI.”