The new laws — Senate Bill 960, authored by Napa Democrat Sen. Christopher Cabaldon, and Assembly Bill 2694, from Assemblymember David Alvarez — will let community college districts add between two and 12 new bachelor’s degree programs annually beginning in 2028. Under the framework, districts with stronger track records on graduation and transfer rates will be allowed to launch more new programs than those with weaker outcomes. The caps won’t affect bachelor’s degrees already up and running.

Currently, 49 community colleges statewide offer or are preparing to offer 66 bachelor’s degree programs. Going forward, districts will also have to demonstrate a genuine regional workforce need before adding a new program, and the annual limits will apply uniformly, regardless of whether a district operates a single campus or a network of nine.

Despite having pushed for the legislation, community college advocates ultimately opposed it after lawmakers made substantial changes just a day before a critical constitutional deadline. Their objection centers on linking degree caps to student outcome data, which they say unfairly penalizes districts serving large numbers of low-income students — students who statistically are less likely to complete certificates, earn associate degrees or transfer to four-year universities, even though they stand to benefit from more local bachelor’s degree options tied to their community’s job market.

Other college system leaders raised concerns that the bills’ late additions left too many unanswered questions. Larry Galizio, president and CEO of the Community College League of California, which represents college presidents and trustees, said in an earlier interview that being asked to endorse a process “that is not completely understood or vetted at the last minute… is just not great policymaking.”

At the heart of both bills is a long-simmering conflict between the community college system and California State University. Since 2022, community colleges have been capped at 30 new bachelor’s degrees per year, provided those programs didn’t overlap with existing offerings at any CSU or University of California campus. In practice, CSU has frequently objected to proposed community college degree programs — and on occasion, colleges moved forward with them regardless.

Community college leaders and their allies in the Legislature argued it was unreasonable to block local bachelor’s degree programs simply because a similar one exists at a UC or CSU campus that might be hundreds of miles away. Students have voiced frustration over not being able to complete a four-year degree close to home, particularly when relocating isn’t financially feasible.

California has 115 community colleges — nearly four times as many as the 31 CSU and UC campuses that currently offer bachelor’s degrees.

Under the newly signed laws, community colleges will be permitted to launch a bachelor’s degree even if a nearby CSU campus offers something similar, but only if that CSU program has turned away more than 25% of applicants from the neighboring community college for three years running.

The legislation also creates, for the first time, a formal process for resolving disputes between the two systems. If California’s labor secretary reviews a contested case and sides with the community college, the CSU objection is effectively overridden. If the labor secretary instead backs CSU, the community college district is barred from applying for a similar program for five years. CSU, which had opposed earlier drafts of the bills, shifted to a neutral stance once the revised language was released.

Community colleges remain generally prohibited from duplicating a UC degree program unless the two sides reach a formal written agreement.

Separately, Newsom vetoed another closely watched bill — this one from Assemblymember Esmeralda Soria, a Merced Democrat — that would have allowed community colleges to offer a bachelor’s degree in nursing, something currently off-limits. It was the third consecutive year Soria has pushed the measure, and the third time Newsom has rejected it. In his veto message, the governor said the new framework created by the Alvarez and Cabaldon bills makes a separate nursing degree pilot unnecessary.

“It is neither necessary nor appropriate to authorize an additional pilot or create an exception to the framework, as this bill proposes,” Newsom wrote. “California’s public higher education segments should instead focus on implementing this newly created, comprehensive system.”

Original source: CalMatters

The post New Laws Signed by Newsom Allow California Community Colleges to Add Up to 12 Bachelor’s Degree Programs appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Senate Bill 960, authored by Sen. Christopher Cabaldon, D-Napa, and Assembly Bill 2694, authored by Assemblymember David Alvarez, D-Chula Vista, both passed with strong support this week. But the versions that emerged look markedly different from what community college advocates originally championed, prompting statewide college leaders to withdraw their backing in the final stretch.

Newsom has rejected similar proposals in the past, vetoing earlier attempts to expand bachelor’s degree offerings at community colleges. This time, though, his office was involved in shaping the legislation, according to Cabaldon, who told his Senate colleagues this week that it marked a rare moment of cooperation between the Legislature and the governor’s office.

“This is the first time we’ve been able to have a productive conversation between the houses and the executive branch,” Cabaldon said during floor remarks.

Together, the two bills create a new framework for deciding when — and how many — bachelor’s degrees community colleges can offer. Starting in 2028, colleges could add anywhere from two to twelve new degree programs, with the number tied to performance metrics such as certificate completion, degree attainment and transfer rates. No single district could roll out more than three new degrees in a given year, and each proposal would need to demonstrate a clear regional workforce need.

That workforce justification could face a challenge from the California State University system, which has frequently sparred with community colleges over similar proposals. Under the new rules, if Cal State objects, the state’s labor secretary would be brought in to settle the dispute.

The new restrictions would only apply to degrees created after 2028; existing bachelor’s degree programs at community colleges would not be affected. Currently, 49 community colleges statewide offer or are preparing to offer a combined 66 bachelor’s degree programs.

Cabaldon described the legislation as a long-overdue framework that would finally bring clarity to a contentious issue.

“This will bring us peace,” he said in an interview. “That doesn’t mean everyone will agree all the time, but it does mean the endless warfare, the disputes, the fighting and the growing pile of bills will come to an end.”

Community college leaders, however, say the amendments were rushed, confusing and overly complicated — even as they acknowledge lawmakers were attempting to tackle a genuinely difficult problem.

“We’re being asked to… support a process that isn’t fully understood and was revised at the last minute, and that’s not good policymaking,” said Larry Galizio, president and CEO of the Community College League of California, which represents college presidents and trustees throughout the state.

Why bachelor’s degrees have become such a flashpoint

The sudden reversal by community college advocates adds another chapter to a debate that has simmered for years.

Community colleges and Cal State have long clashed over which bachelor’s degrees community colleges should be allowed to offer. A 2021 state law was supposed to settle the matter, but disagreements persisted — largely over what counts as program “duplication.” Under that law, community colleges were barred from creating degree programs that already existed at any Cal State or University of California campus, even if that campus was hundreds of miles away.

Critics, including several lawmakers, argued the rule was unfair to community college students who often cannot relocate to attend a distant university. In some cases, community colleges moved forward with new degree programs anyway, despite objections from Cal State, according to reporting by EdSource.

Supporters and opponents of expanding bachelor’s degree access at community colleges continue to cite conflicting data to bolster their arguments.

One recent study found that 29 of California’s 116 community colleges are located at least 25 miles from the nearest public university, effectively isolating roughly 157,000 students who cannot easily relocate or commute to pursue a four-year degree elsewhere.

Some students argue that their local community colleges need the ability to offer bachelor’s degrees because area employers require them — certificates and associate degrees alone often aren’t enough. Yet under current law, those colleges can be blocked from offering such programs simply because a Cal State campus 500 miles away already offers something similar.

At the same time, community colleges statewide continue to post low transfer rates. Only 21% of students who intend to transfer to a four-year university actually do so within four years, according to the state auditor. Some see this as evidence of a broken transfer pipeline that could be fixed by allowing more bachelor’s degree programs. Others argue it shows community colleges aren’t yet equipped to expand their academic offerings, especially since many also struggle with low completion rates for certificates and associate degrees.

How the bills tackle degree duplication

In response to years of gridlock, Alvarez and Cabaldon each introduced comprehensive legislation this year aimed at letting community colleges create bachelor’s degree programs even when similar degrees exist at nearby Cal State campuses. Community colleges initially backed these versions, while Cal State pushed back, favoring streamlined transfer pathways instead — a solution some within the university system saw as protecting enrollment and tuition revenue at a time when several Cal State campuses are already grappling with declining student numbers.

The revised, combined legislation now allows community colleges to propose new bachelor’s degrees even if a nearby Cal State campus offers something similar — but only if that Cal State program has accepted less than 75% of applicants from the neighboring community college for three consecutive years. Colleges would still need to submit workforce need reports and stay within the newly imposed degree caps. That workforce justification could stem from employers struggling to fill positions that require a four-year degree, according to the bill language.

Unlike current law, which offers no formal process for resolving disputes between community colleges and Cal State over duplication, the new system gives the state labor secretary authority to settle disagreements. If the labor secretary sides with the community college, Cal State’s objection is overridden. But there are consequences for losing that fight: if the labor secretary sides with Cal State, the community college district is barred from proposing a similar program for five years.

Community colleges remain fully barred from duplicating degree programs offered at any UC campus unless they receive written consent from the university.

Why community colleges are now pushing back

The newly imposed caps on how many degrees a district may offer have become a major sticking point. Under the bills, districts would be evaluated based on completion rates and how those rates compare to the statewide average.

The legislation “would make a district’s eligibility partly dependent on how it compares to every other district in the state,” according to a letter of opposition sent to Cabaldon and signed by Sonya Christian, chancellor of the California Community Colleges system. A district could improve its own outcomes and still face the same restrictions “or even see its eligibility shift simply because the statewide average changed,” she wrote.

Galizio, of the Community College League, also objects to the proposed caps on new degree creation. He noted in an interview that campuses with lower graduation rates often serve larger populations of low-income students — the very students who stand to benefit most from expanded access to bachelor’s degree programs.

Not every community college leader views the legislation as harmful, however. Jose Fierro, president and superintendent of the Cerritos Community College District, said that based on his college’s completion rates, he expects to be authorized to add six to eight new bachelor’s degree programs beginning in 2028. That, he said, is plenty for now. Cerritos currently offers two bachelor’s degrees and plans to roll out additional programs in 2027.

“We’re not trying to become a university. That’s not our mission. We’re trying to align with industry and provide pathways to social and economic mobility for our students,” Fierro said in an interview.

Still, he acknowledged that what works for his campus may not work system-wide.

“For some of us, this is workable,” he said. “For other colleges, this is going to create some real additional challenges.”

Original source: CalMatters

The post Community Colleges Suddenly Balk at Plan to Expand Bachelor’s Degree Offerings appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Despite the opposition, Senate Bill 960, authored by Sen. Christopher Cabaldon, D-Napa, and Assembly Bill 2694, authored by Assemblymember David Alvarez, D-Chula Vista, both cleared the Legislature this week with strong support and now await Gov. Gavin Newsom’s signature.

Newsom has previously rejected similar proposals to broaden community colleges’ bachelor’s degree offerings. This time, though, his office reportedly helped shape the final language. Cabaldon told fellow senators Monday that the process marked a shift in tone.

“This is the first time that we’ve been able to engage in productive conversation between the houses and the executive branch,” he said during floor remarks.

Together, the two bills would establish a new framework for deciding which community college districts can create bachelor’s programs and how many they’re allowed to offer. Beginning in 2028, colleges could add anywhere from two to 12 new bachelor’s degrees, with the exact number tied to how well their students perform on measures such as certificate completion, degree attainment and transfer rates. No single district could roll out more than three new degrees in a given year, and each proposed program would need to demonstrate a genuine regional workforce demand — a claim the California State University system could challenge. If that happens, the state’s labor secretary would step in to resolve the dispute, a role meant to end the recurring clashes between the two systems over academic turf.

Any new restrictions would only apply to degrees created after 2028. Programs already up and running would be unaffected. Currently, 49 community colleges either offer or are preparing to launch a combined 66 bachelor’s degree programs statewide.

Cabaldon described the legislation as a long-overdue resolution to years of policy gridlock.

“This will give us peace,” he said in an interview. “That doesn’t mean everybody’s going to agree all of the time, but it does mean the endless war and bickering and fighting and more and more legislation will come to an end.”

Yet many community college administrators say the process moved too quickly, leaving key details unclear. Larry Galizio, president and CEO of the Community College League of California, which represents college trustees and administrators statewide, said the last-minute nature of the changes undermines confidence in the outcome.

“We’re being asked to support a process that is not completely understood or vetted at the last minute, and so that’s just not great policymaking,” Galizio said.

A long-running turf battle

The community college system’s reversal is the latest chapter in a debate that has simmered for years. Historically, the biggest sticking point between community colleges and Cal State has been what’s known as “degree duplication.” A 2021 law barred community colleges from offering a bachelor’s degree if any Cal State or University of California campus already provided a similar program — regardless of how far away that campus might be.

Critics argued the rule was unfair to students who can’t easily relocate for a four-year degree. Some community colleges moved forward with new programs anyway, defying Cal State’s objections, according to reporting by EdSource.

Supporters and opponents of expanding community college bachelor’s programs often cite conflicting evidence to make their case. One recent study found that 29 of California’s 116 community colleges are located at least 25 miles from the nearest public university, effectively leaving roughly 157,000 students without convenient access to a four-year institution.

Some students say that without local bachelor’s degree options, they’re stuck — even though regional employers are asking for degrees beyond an associate’s or certificate. Yet critics point to the community college system’s low transfer rate — only about 21% of students intending to transfer actually do so within four years, according to the California State Auditor. That statistic, some argue, suggests the system needs to fix its transfer pipeline before adding more four-year programs, especially given that many colleges also struggle with low completion rates for existing certificates and associate degrees.

New rules on duplication

To address the standoff, Alvarez and Cabaldon initially crafted broader bills that would have let community colleges offer bachelor’s degrees even when similar ones exist at nearby Cal State campuses. Community college leaders backed those early versions, while Cal State pushed back, favoring smoother transfer pathways into its own bachelor’s programs instead. Some within the Cal State system worry that community college expansion could pull away students and tuition dollars at a time when several campuses are already facing enrollment drops.

The compromise legislation allows community colleges to propose a bachelor’s degree that overlaps with a Cal State program only if that Cal State campus has accepted fewer than 75% of transfer applicants from the community college in question over three consecutive years. Colleges would still need to document workforce demand and stay within the newly created degree caps. Acceptable justification could include local employers struggling to fill jobs that require a bachelor’s degree.

Unlike current law, which offers no formal way to break a deadlock between the two systems, the new bills give the state labor secretary authority to make a final call. If the labor secretary sides with the community college, Cal State’s objection is overridden. But if the ruling favors Cal State, the community college district would be barred from proposing a similar program for five years. Community colleges would generally still be prohibited from duplicating any UC program unless the university system gives written permission.

Pushback over new limits

The biggest objection from community college leaders centers on the newly imposed caps tied to student outcome data. Under the bills, a district’s eligibility to add new degrees would depend in part on how its completion rates stack up against the statewide average — a moving target that could shift even if a district’s own performance improves.

In a letter opposing the legislation, California Community Colleges Chancellor Sonya Christian warned that the formula could penalize districts unfairly. “A district could improve its own student outcomes” and still be capped, she wrote, “or even see its eligibility change simply because the statewide average changed.”

Galizio raised a similar concern, noting that colleges with lower completion rates often serve larger populations of low-income students — the same students who could benefit most from access to a four-year degree closer to home.

Not every community college leader views the legislation as a setback. Jose Fierro, president and superintendent of the Cerritos Community College District, expects his district’s completion rates would allow it to add six to eight new bachelor’s programs once the rules take effect in 2028 — more than enough for his college’s immediate plans. Cerritos currently offers two bachelor’s degrees and is preparing to add more by 2027.

“We are not trying to become a university. It’s not our mission,” Fierro said. “We’re trying to align with industry and provide pathways for social and economic mobility for our students.”

Still, he acknowledged that what works for his district may not work everywhere.

“For some of us this is workable,” he said. “For other colleges, this is going to bring some additional challenges.”

Original source: CalMatters

The post Community Colleges Reverse Course, Push Back on Plan to Expand Bachelor’s Degree Offerings appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Over the past three years, the state prison system has spent $23.2 million to provide 30,000 laptops to incarcerated students. Nearly half of those devices went to about 13,000 people enrolled in California community college courses while in prison.

The effort is helping move prison education away from the long-standing correspondence model, in which students received paper packets, completed assignments by hand and mailed work back to instructors. While some colleges still use mail-based courses, online instruction is becoming more common as laptops reach more students.

Supporters say the technology gives incarcerated students more timely access to assignments, feedback and instructors, while also building computer skills needed for jobs after release. Others caution that online courses cannot fully replace the value of in-person teaching, where students can interact directly with faculty and classmates.

Richard Moye, 44, an incarcerated student who has been in prison for 16 years, said technology skills are essential for people preparing to return to the workforce.

“The more we understand about today’s world, the better we’ll be equipped to get out into the workforce as things continue to change,” Moye said. “We don’t want to get left behind. … Tech literacy is of the utmost importance behind prison walls.”

The expansion of prison-based online learning follows a 2024 recommendation from the state Legislative Analyst’s Office, which urged improvements to Rising Scholars, the California Community Colleges program that serves incarcerated students. The office pointed to limited classroom space in prisons and suggested that more online courses could help colleges reach additional students. It also recommended giving priority to students working toward their first degree, rather than allowing people seeking second or third degrees to take limited seats.

Of California’s 116 community colleges, 104 now partner with prisons to offer courses or degree programs. Community college data show more than 21,000 courses were held in prisons during fall 2025. Twenty colleges offered in-person instruction, with faculty traveling to prisons to teach. The rest provided classes online or through correspondence, though mail-based courses are becoming less common, according to the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office.

The system does not have a precise count of how many incarcerated students are taking online classes compared with traditional correspondence courses. Colleges may use different reporting labels for those courses, making statewide tracking inconsistent, the Chancellor’s Office said.

In-person prison classes face practical limits. Classroom space is often scarce because prison classrooms are also used for other programs and meetings. At times, classes are held in gyms or dining areas. Enrollment in a typical in-person course can range from 18 to 40 students, and many colleges enroll students on a first-come, first-served basis.

Orlando Sanchez Zavala, a policy analyst with the Legislative Analyst’s Office, said that can mean students already holding degrees may take seats from those still pursuing their first college credential. Prioritizing first-degree students, he said, could have the greatest effect on reducing recidivism.

Earning a degree in prison can expand job prospects after release and help people reintegrate. According to a state prison recidivism report, incarcerated people who earned an associate degree during the 2018-19 fiscal year had an 8.5% conviction rate in the three years after release. The overall conviction rate for people released that year was 41.9%.

For students, the path to a degree can be difficult regardless of course format.

Joseph Bruno Martinez, 40, said he had trouble getting into classes while housed at high-security prisons, where lockdowns could interrupt instruction across an entire institution.

Garret Eiferman, 56, who was formerly incarcerated and is now a graduate student at Cal State Northridge, said correctional officers were not always willing or able to support students trying to complete coursework. He said he had to build relationships with officers to gain access to classrooms after 7 p.m. and sometimes had to persuade staff to let classmates leave their housing units to attend class.

Eiferman said he also dealt with outdated textbooks, some with hard covers removed for safety reasons, little feedback on correspondence assignments, and the challenge of balancing school with prison work and other required programs. Although he did not take online-only courses while incarcerated, he said he understands why laptops could help students facing similar obstacles.

For Moye, who takes both online and in-person classes through Solano Community College at California Medical Facility in Vacaville, online coursework is valuable because it brings prison education closer to how colleges operate outside prison walls. Many students and instructors now use Canvas, the learning management system common across California’s higher education systems, to submit assignments, receive grades and communicate.

Isela Ocegueda, vice president of instruction at Coastline College, teaches online English to incarcerated students. She said using Canvas can make it easier for students to continue their education after release because they are already familiar with the same platform used on many campuses. At Coastline, about 80% of instruction is online.

Until 2023, Coastline taught prison courses through mail correspondence. The college now describes its model as “Canvas-supported correspondence.”

Ocegueda said the online format allows for more detailed feedback and more creative assignments. In one English course, she began the semester by asking students to write a journal entry introducing themselves and explaining how she could support them. For the final research paper, students can submit multiple drafts and receive edits much faster than through the mail.

“Imagine just trying to receive essays in the mail and then make your corrections and then send them back,” Ocegueda said. “That was really hard to do in the mail version of correspondence. … Canvas-supported correspondence allows more for that writing process to actually happen.”

Still, online learning in prison remains uneven. Wi-Fi access differs by facility, and incarcerated students may wait days for certain reading materials or research documents to be approved by prison librarians.

Students at Pelican Bay State Prison in Del Norte County and California Institution for Women in San Bernardino County have said they cannot access Canvas from their cells because of limited Wi-Fi. Students at Folsom State Prison and San Quentin Rehabilitation Center have reported stronger connections that allow them to complete coursework from their housing units.

A spokesperson for the state prison system said incarcerated people have Wi-Fi access in housing units at all but four California prisons. All prisons have Wi-Fi in education areas and classrooms, though the quality of the signal may vary.

Some incarcerated students pursuing bachelor’s degrees have also reported difficulty accessing research materials online and said they wished they could conduct basic internet searches for academic work.

Ben Brookeshire, an English professor at Solano College, said one of his biggest challenges is the lag time students face when trying to access digital research materials. Some documents available through research databases must first be reviewed by prison librarians before students can use them.

Despite the rise of online learning, many students and faculty continue to value in-person instruction.

Eiferman completed most of his prison coursework by mail through Palo Verde College and Coastline College between 2009 and 2019. During his incarceration, he earned an associate degree in arts, an associate degree in science and a business certificate. He was also working toward a U.S. history degree when he was paroled in 2020.

He said his interaction with professors during correspondence courses was limited, and detailed feedback was rare. That made the transition to university coursework more difficult after his release.

His first in-person college class came through Bakersfield College at Golden State Community Correctional Facility, a medium-security prison in the southern San Joaquin Valley. The course was math, a subject he had long struggled with, but Eiferman said the classroom setting helped concepts click. He also found himself encouraging and helping other students stay enrolled.

Moye said in-person courses give students a clearer understanding of what instructors expect and allow for peer support, group work, tutoring and discussion.

Community college data show incarcerated students had a 77% success rate in internet-based and correspondence courses in spring 2025, compared with an 85% success rate in in-person classes. Success is defined as earning a C or better, or passing a course graded on a pass-fail basis. In in-person courses, incarcerated students performed 10 percentage points better than community college students overall.

“I’m a fan of in-person learning,” Moye said. “That’s my favorite style of learning, because to me, it resembles most what’s going on in society. If we’re trying to prepare incarcerated men and women for society, we have to have it look as much like society as possible.”

Brookeshire said he recognizes that online prison education will continue to grow, but he chooses to teach in person because he believes it is the best way to connect with students.

“I’m very passionate,” he said. “I really believe there’s magic in a classroom, and I really believe that face-to-face instruction is irreplaceable.”

Original source: CalMatters

The post California Community Colleges Put State-Issued Prison Student Laptops to Work appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The new aid, known as short-term or workforce Pell Grants, expands the long-running federal Pell Grant program, which provides need-based aid to college students for tuition and living costs. For the first time, federal grants will be available for students in certain short-term workforce programs, including fields such as automotive technology and computer training, many of which last about 10 weeks.

Both public and private institutions may qualify. Federal officials have not finalized all details, but the average student is expected to receive between $1,000 and $3,000.

The change could have significant implications for California community colleges, including those across Southern California and the Inland Empire, where many students pursue career technical education in health care, skilled trades, technology and public safety. But state officials say California does not yet have the systems in place to administer the new aid smoothly.

Daisy Gonzales, executive director of the California Student Aid Commission, has said in legislative hearings and in an interview with CalMatters that students likely will not receive the grants until weeks or possibly months after the federal start date. She described financial aid systems as “extremely complex” and said California lacks the infrastructure needed to meet the federal timeline.

Creating a new financial aid program requires coordination between federal officials, the state, colleges and local districts. California must build new administrative systems, enter into agreements with schools and ensure programs meet federal requirements before students can receive funds.

The grants are part of a bipartisan national push to better connect higher education with workforce needs. Supporters say the money could help students quickly train for jobs without taking on debt. But critics and policy experts warn that short-term job training programs have produced uneven results, especially when public dollars flow to programs that lead to low wages or unstable work.

In 2024, CalMatters reported on how California job centers used federal funds to help low-income and unemployed adults attend short-term training programs, including at for-profit schools. Public subsidies supported training for truck drivers and nursing assistants, occupations that can involve low pay, difficult working conditions and high turnover. Some for-profit schools were under investigation for various violations while enrolling students. CalMatters also found that most truck-driving schools had little oversight, and some nursing assistants earned less than $30,000 after completing their programs.

The new short-term Pell Grants include federal rules intended to limit those risks. Eligible programs must show that graduates earn more than the federal poverty level in a high-demand occupation, and only certain accredited schools will qualify. California lawmakers are also weighing a proposal that would further narrow which programs can receive the new funding.

Because neither the state nor the federal government closely tracks short-term workforce training programs, it remains unclear how many programs exist or how many students could benefit. The California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office told CalMatters in an email that it is too early to provide estimates.

Gonzales pointed to Cal Grant C, a state program for students enrolled in career training programs that last at least 15 weeks, as one indication of potential demand. This year, about 225,000 students were potentially eligible for Cal Grant C. But the program has a relatively small budget and serves just under 7,800 students annually. The new federal Pell expansion could eventually bring billions of dollars in federal spending nationally.

In San Diego County, Southwestern College President Mark Sanchez said the grants could be especially important for students who work full time but still struggle to cover basic living expenses. At the Chula Vista campus, he said, some students, including U.S. citizens, live in Tijuana because housing is more affordable and cross the border each day to attend classes in California.

Sanchez has promoted the new Pell Grants to state and local officials, arguing they could help students move into better-paying careers. Southwestern College estimated that about 1,500 students could qualify across roughly 50 programs, ranging from music to accounting.

To participate, schools will have to work with state and federal agencies to prove that at least 70% of graduates from eligible programs are employed and earning wages above the federal poverty threshold. But education and workforce data are often scattered, incomplete or not collected at all, said Su Jin Jez, executive director of California Competes, an education policy nonprofit.

State records may show, for example, that a college graduate works for a school district and how much that person earns, Jez said. But the data may not show whether the graduate is working as a teacher, secretary, attorney or custodian.

“Our state invests billions in aligning higher education with the labor market, and we don’t have a good way of knowing whether those investments are paying off,” Jez said.

California Competes is sponsoring two bills this year. One, by state Sen. Christopher Cabaldon, D-Napa, would require state workforce agencies to collect more data. The other, by Assemblymember Jacqui Irwin, D-Thousand Oaks, would regulate which programs qualify for the new short-term Pell Grants. Assemblymember Juan Alanis, R-Modesto, is a co-author of Irwin’s bill, and the Institute for College Access & Success is a co-sponsor.

The governor’s office has separately drafted emergency legislation that includes proposed regulations for the new grants. The California Student Aid Commission does not take formal positions on pending bills, but Gonzales has publicly praised Irwin’s legislation and criticized the governor’s proposal, saying it risks creating a fragmented system.

State officials are also looking to avoid the mistakes of a recent financial aid program that failed to gain traction. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Legislature created the Learning-Aligned Employment Program, intended to provide millions of dollars in aid to working students and help them secure jobs related to their fields of study.

Gonzales, who was then vice chancellor of the community college system, said the program fell short. It relied on one-time funding and had only three years to succeed, she said, but lacked the professional development and technical assistance needed to help colleges and students use it effectively.

“You can’t just introduce a new tool and say, ‘Students, apply,’” Gonzales said.

By the end of the three-year period, few students had applied, and state lawmakers chose to cancel the program. Nicole Kangas, a spokesperson for the Student Aid Commission, said in an email to CalMatters that the Learning-Aligned Employment Program should serve as a warning as California implements the new Pell Grants.

Congress approved the Pell expansion last summer, but the U.S. Department of Education did not finalize its rules until last month, leaving states less than two months before the July 1 launch. California now must complete a long list of administrative and regulatory steps, including agreements between the state and each participating college district or university.

When the Student Aid Commission created similar agreements with colleges for the Middle Class Scholarship, the contracts ran 60 to 120 pages and took about nine months to complete, Gonzales said.

“We are really behind,” she said, adding that several other states have already passed legislation related to the new grants. Measures such as Irwin’s bill, she said, could give California “an opportunity to catch up.”

For Sanchez at Southwestern College, the challenge will not end once the grants are available. Colleges will still have to make sure current and prospective students know the aid exists and are encouraged to apply.

Many community college students face financial hardship, including some who are homeless, but large numbers either are unaware of financial aid, hesitate to apply or submit incomplete applications. Fewer than half of California community college students applied for financial aid last year, and state data show that even fewer received it.

Original source: CalMatters

The post California Moves to Launch New Financial Aid Grants for Short-Term Job Training appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The U.S. Department of Education is expected to expand Pell Grants beginning July 1 to cover certain short-term workforce training programs — courses that often last about 10 weeks and prepare students for jobs in fields such as automotive technology, information technology, health care, skilled trades and public safety. The change could affect students at community colleges and other eligible institutions across California, including campuses throughout Southern California and the Inland Empire.

But the California Student Aid Commission, the state agency responsible for administering financial aid, says the state does not yet have the systems in place to launch the program on the federal timeline.

Daisy Gonzales, the commission’s executive director, has said in legislative hearings and in an interview with CalMatters that students likely will not see the new grants until weeks or possibly months after the July 1 start date. Financial aid systems are highly complicated, she said, and California lacks the infrastructure to move that quickly.

The new awards, known as short-term Pell Grants or workforce Pell Grants, are an expansion of the long-running federal Pell Grant program, which provides need-based aid to low-income college students for tuition and living expenses. Until now, students in many brief job training programs generally have not qualified for federal student aid.

Under the new program, eligible students are expected to receive roughly $1,000 to $3,000, though final details are still being worked out. Public and private institutions may qualify if their programs meet federal requirements.

The grants are part of a broader bipartisan effort to connect higher education more directly with employers’ workforce needs. Supporters say the aid could help students quickly gain skills for better-paying jobs. But California’s past experience with publicly funded workforce training has also raised concerns about oversight, job quality and whether students benefit enough from the programs.

CalMatters previously examined how California job centers used federal funds to help low-income and unemployed adults enroll in short-term training programs at for-profit colleges. Public money supported training for careers such as truck driving and nursing assisting, fields that can be associated with low wages, difficult working conditions or high turnover. Some schools receiving students were under investigation for violations, and oversight of many truck-driving schools was limited. Some nursing assistants earned less than $30,000 after completing their programs.

The new federal Pell Grants include rules intended to prevent those problems. Programs must show that graduates earn wages above the federal poverty line and are entering fields considered in demand. Schools also must meet verification requirements. California lawmakers are considering additional restrictions on which programs should be allowed to participate.

A major challenge is that neither state nor federal officials have a comprehensive accounting of short-term workforce programs. That makes it difficult to know how many programs exist or how many students could benefit.

California’s 116 community colleges are likely to be among the main participants because they already offer many job-focused certificate and training programs. But the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office told CalMatters it is too early to estimate how many students might qualify.

One point of comparison is Cal Grant C, a state program for students in career education programs lasting at least 15 weeks. About 225,000 students were potentially eligible this year, according to state data. But Cal Grant C is much smaller than the new federal effort, serving fewer than 7,800 students annually.

In Southern California, college leaders say the aid could be especially important for students facing high housing and living costs.

At Southwestern College in Chula Vista, President Mark Sanchez said many students work full time but still struggle to cover basic expenses. Some students, including U.S. citizens, live across the border in Tijuana because housing is more affordable there and commute to campus in San Diego County.

Sanchez has urged state and local officials to support the new grants, saying they could help students move into higher-paying work. Southwestern College officials estimate about 1,500 students could be eligible across roughly 50 programs, from musicianship to accounting.

To qualify for the grants, colleges will need to prove to state and federal agencies that at least 70% of graduates from eligible programs are employed and earning above the federal poverty line. That requirement could be difficult because the necessary employment and wage data are scattered, incomplete or not collected in some cases.

Su Jin Jez, chief executive of the education nonprofit California Competes, said the state lacks the tools to fully evaluate whether workforce education investments are producing good results. For example, state data may show that a graduate works for a school district and how much that person earns, but not whether the graduate is employed as a teacher, secretary, attorney or custodian.

California Competes is sponsoring two bills this year aimed at improving workforce education accountability. One bill, by Sen. Christopher Cabaldon, D-Napa, would require state workforce agencies to collect more data. Another, by Assemblymember Jacqui Irwin, D-Thousand Oaks, would regulate which programs can qualify for the new short-term Pell Grants. Assemblymember Juan Alanis, R-Modesto, is a co-author of Irwin’s bill, and The Institute for College Access & Success is a co-sponsor.

The governor’s office also has proposed emergency legislation with regulations for the new grants. The California Student Aid Commission does not take formal positions on bills, but Gonzales has praised Irwin’s proposal and criticized the governor’s plan, saying it could create a fragmented system.

State officials say they are trying to avoid repeating the problems of a pandemic-era financial aid initiative known as the Learning-Aligned Employment Program. Created by Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Legislature, that program was intended to provide aid to working students and help them find jobs connected to their studies.

Gonzales, who was then deputy chancellor of the community college system, called the program a failure. It relied on one-time funding and had only three years to succeed, she said, but lacked the professional development and technical support needed to make it work. Few students applied, and lawmakers eventually cut the program.

Nicole Kangas, a spokesperson for the Student Aid Commission, said in a statement that the experience should serve as a warning for the rollout of workforce Pell Grants.

Although Congress approved the expanded Pell Grants last summer, the U.S. Education Department finalized its regulations only last month, leaving states less than two months to prepare before the July 1 launch date. California officials and colleges still must complete a lengthy list of administrative steps, including agreements between the state and individual college districts and universities.

When the Student Aid Commission created similar agreements with universities for the Middle Class Scholarship, Gonzales said, the contracts ran 60 to 120 pages and took about nine months to finalize.

“We really are behind,” Gonzales said, noting that several other states have already adopted legislation. She said new state regulations, including Irwin’s bill, could help California catch up.

Even after the grants become available, college leaders say another hurdle remains: making sure students know the money exists and helping them apply.

Sanchez said Southwestern College will need to reach both current and prospective students with information about the new aid. Many community college students face serious financial hardship, including homelessness, but either do not know about financial aid, are reluctant to apply or submit incomplete applications.

State figures show that less than half of California community college students applied for financial aid last year, and fewer ultimately received it.

Original source: CalMatters

The post California Moves to Launch New Grants for Short-Term Job Training appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Roughly 40% of California community college courses are now offered online, according to CalMatters. The format has become especially important for students balancing school with jobs, caregiving duties and other responsibilities — a reality familiar to many students across Southern California and the Inland Empire.

But educators say online learning can also leave students feeling disconnected. Classes that lack face-to-face interaction may be harder for some students to navigate, particularly when courses are asynchronous and require students to manage their time independently.

Di Xu, a professor at UC Irvine’s School of Education, said online courses demand strong “self-directed learning skills,” including a high level of time management. In traditional classrooms, she said, interaction tends to happen more naturally.

“In an in-person environment interaction happens naturally,” Xu said. “But in an online environment, especially asynchronous, that opportunity needs to be embedded. Otherwise, the student will feel very lonely.”

Despite those challenges, demand for online courses remains high. Students often prefer the flexibility, and colleges can generally offer online classes at a lower cost than in-person instruction.

Rebecca Ruan-O’Shaughnessy, director of program and strategy at the College Futures Foundation and a former executive with the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office, said colleges must adjust to the needs of today’s students. Among the ideas she described as promising are shorter course formats and programs that better connect coursework with the work experience many adult students already have.

Some faculty members are also looking at specific subjects where online instruction may not provide enough preparation. Julia Simon, a French professor at UC Davis who chairs a university task force on languages, said students in online foreign language courses may not get enough speaking practice.

Simon said that can leave students underprepared once they arrive at UC Davis. Because the university cannot require students to repeat classes they have already completed, she said one possible solution would be to offer conversation courses as a form of additional support.

The effort reflects a broader challenge for California colleges: preserving the convenience and access of online education while improving student engagement, interaction and academic readiness.

Original source: CalMatters

The post CA colleges try to improve online classes appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

More than 2 million students attend California community colleges — about 60 times the undergraduate enrollment of UC Berkeley. Yet since COVID-19 forced colleges online, a large share of instruction has stayed there. About 40% of community college classes in California are now offered online, according to Melissa Villarin, a spokesperson for the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office.

College leaders say online courses have opened doors for working adults, parents, caregivers and students who otherwise could not fit college into their daily lives. But students and faculty also describe serious tradeoffs: less interaction, weaker engagement, loneliness, uneven teaching quality and, in some cases, courses that feel more like a checklist than an education.

The shift matters across Southern California and the Inland Empire, where community colleges serve large numbers of working students trying to balance school with jobs, family obligations and long commutes. It also matters financially for colleges. California’s community colleges are funded largely based on enrollment, and surveys show many students prefer the flexibility of online classes, giving colleges an incentive to keep expanding them.

The result is a system still trying to answer a difficult question: Can online education be as effective as learning in person?

For some students, the answer depends heavily on the instructor.

At San Joaquin Delta College in Stockton, student Lupe Archundia said her online microeconomics course relied on prerecorded lectures, some of them more than 10 years old. Quizzes were multiple choice and graded by computer. She said the professor made quiz answers available before students took the tests.

“I am a 39-year-old woman,” Archundia said. “It’s not like I just finished high school and I want easy test answers.”

Archundia works full time as a secretary and has two children. She often studies at night, using cardboard boxes to turn her dining room table into a makeshift standing desk. She is pursuing a bachelor’s degree with hopes of advancing in her career.

At first, she said, she spent about three hours studying before each quiz. After realizing the answers were available, she began taking shortcuts. She earned a high score on the online exam, but said she still does not fully understand some of the material, including elasticity.

She said she feels partly responsible. “I’m responsible, too,” she said.

Research on online education remains mixed. A 2025 study found that students generally perform worse in online courses than in face-to-face classes, though the gap has narrowed. Di Xu, a professor at UC Irvine’s School of Education, said online classes can also help students stay employed while attending school and may improve their chances of eventually finishing a degree.

But online learning places heavy demands on students, Xu said. It requires strong time management and the ability to direct one’s own learning. In a classroom, interaction happens more naturally. Online, especially in asynchronous classes where students watch recorded material on their own schedule, that connection has to be intentionally built into the course.

“If not, the student will feel very lonely,” Xu said.

Most online classes at California community colleges are asynchronous, meaning students do not meet live with an instructor at a set time. Surveys by the RP Group, an education research nonprofit, show students tend to prefer that format even over live online courses.

Archundia said she would rather take classes in person, but evening options are limited, particularly for the English courses she wants. She dreams of becoming a writer and is considering changing her major from business administration to English, but said she is unsure which classes she needs.

When she contacted a counselor in April for help choosing courses, the next available appointment was roughly three weeks away. She still had not found a counseling time that fit around her work schedule.

Alex Breitler, a spokesperson for Delta College, said online courses expand access for students juggling major responsibilities and for many who otherwise could not attend college. He acknowledged that counseling appointments are often booked weeks in advance because demand is high. The college, he said, is trying to respond with online question forms and drop-in counseling options that do not require appointments.

Rebecca Ruan-O’Shaughnessy, director of program and strategy at the College Futures Foundation and a former executive at the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office, said advising and support are especially important for online students. But she said colleges need to do more than move traditional classes onto a digital platform.

Online courses should be redesigned for the format, she said, with different structures, stronger support and approaches that recognize many students are adults with work experience and full-time jobs.

“That is the difficult part for community colleges and other institutions,” Ruan-O’Shaughnessy said. “Frankly, they don’t have the incentive to do that level of work, because that’s a lot of work.”

In San Diego County, Cyndi Cunningham enrolled at Palomar College in San Marcos in 2022 after the pandemic disrupted her retail job at a local mall. She was starting college for the first time and took mostly online general education and introductory courses.

She struggled to focus and manage her time. She said she wanted more in-person options but often could not find them.

“I only ended up taking one class in person per semester — not because I didn’t want to take in-person classes — but because I couldn’t find them,” Cunningham said. “I felt like I wasn’t learning; I was just kind of doing tasks.”

She said she also noticed shortcuts from instructors. Two Chicano Studies courses she took were taught by the same professor, and she said he used the same lecture in both classes.

Cunningham has since transferred to Cal State San Marcos, where she is majoring in ethnic studies and plans to become a high school teacher. The difference, she said, has made clear what she missed.

“Even engaging with other students is so much different in person than on a discussion board,” she said. “I realized more how much of a disservice the online classes did.”

Online courses can reduce some expenses for colleges because they do not require classroom space and can enroll more students, Xu said. But quality online instruction often requires additional investments, including faculty training, course design support and specialized counseling.

Online education “has the potential to save a lot of cost,” Xu said, but only if colleges are “willing to sacrifice a lot of the quality elements that are important for students.”

Some disciplines face particular concerns. Julia Simon, a French professor at UC Davis and chair of a university task force on languages, said foreign language instruction is especially difficult to move online. Language classes are typically small and depend on regular speaking practice and cultural exchange.

At the same time, she said, community colleges and UC campuses are expanding online language offerings. Sacramento City College, for example, is offering four French classes in fall 2026, all of them fully online and asynchronous.

“It’s an enormous problem,” Simon said.

Students who complete online language courses may arrive at UC Davis without enough speaking practice, she said. But the university cannot require them to repeat courses they have already passed. Simon said she is considering creating conversation courses that would function as remedial support.

State lawmakers and education officials have spent millions of dollars since the pandemic to improve online instruction. New rules are intended to increase interaction between students and faculty. Colleges have also expanded training for online teaching and hired staff to help design digital courses.

Still, a 2024 RP Group survey found that most faculty members who had taught at least one online class preferred teaching in person.

For Tina Rocha, a 55-year-old Delta College student, online learning has been both a lifeline and a frustration. Rocha began college in 2024 after recovering from three strokes in 2020. Because of her disability, she sometimes needs reminders to submit assignments and accommodations for certain lights or sounds that can affect her vision and cause twitching.

Her creative writing professor, she said, spent a sabbatical studying ways to better teach students with learning disabilities. Rocha said the effort showed. The professor has been patient and accommodating, making the online class a positive experience.

Online education can be a “wonderful alternative,” Rocha said.

Her home reflects the discipline required to manage school remotely. She studies nightly at her dining room table, surrounded by notebooks. A calendar on the wall is filled with notes, and a whiteboard near the entrance lists the week’s responsibilities in color-coded lines.

But another online course, a film class, has been much harder. Rocha said the professor keeps a lava lamp in the background that casts patterns on the ceiling. The visual effect can trigger symptoms for her. When she asked him to turn it off, she said he told her he tried but could not, without explaining why.

Now, when he speaks on screen, Rocha places a sticky note over the image to avoid the effect. She tried to switch into an in-person film class, but by then, only online sections were available.

“It all depends on the professor,” she said.

Original source: CalMatters

The post ‘I felt like I wasn’t learning’: Community college students struggle with online education appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

MSJC received a “Mixed Associate Large” designation in the 2025 Institutional Classification, placing it among only 78 institutions nationwide—just 2% of U.S. colleges and universities included in this category. This classification is based on various factors, including degree offerings, subject areas, and institutional size, and it groups MSJC with peer institutions offering a diverse mix of associate degrees at a large scale.

MSJC also earned a “Higher Access, Medium Earnings” designation in the newly introduced Student Access and Earnings Classification. This classification includes 1,321 institutions, accounting for 43% of all classified U.S. colleges and universities. It reflects MSJC’s strong record in serving historically underrepresented students and helping them achieve competitive earnings outcomes post-graduation.

“These designations reflect MSJC’s unwavering commitment to two of our top institutional priorities—Equity in Access and Equity in Success,” said Dr. Roger Schultz, MSJC Superintendent/President. “We are proud to be recognized for enrolling and supporting a diverse student population, and for preparing our students to contribute meaningfully to their communities and the workforce.”

The Institutional Classification is a revised framework that offers a descriptive snapshot of institutions based on publicly reported data. It is intended to promote research, analysis, and understanding of the structure of American higher education.

The Student Access and Earnings Classification, added in 2025, evaluates colleges based on two key dimensions: the enrollment of Pell Grant recipients and underrepresented racial/ethnic students (Access) and post-attendance earnings eight years after entry (Earnings), contextualized by local economic and demographic data.

For more information on the 2025 Carnegie Classifications and to explore an interactive database, visit: https://carnegieclassifications.acenet.edu.

The post MSJC Recognized in 2025 Carnegie Classifications for Institutional Impact and Student Access appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

With initial results from all precincts, 56.8% of voters backed the bond measure, and 43.2% opposed it. Still to be counted are mail-in ballots not yet received and provisional ballots. Support for the bond broke 60% in Los Angeles, Alpine, Santa Barbara, San Francisco, Mendocino, Alameda, Yolo, Marin and San Mateo counties. Only counties in the state’s far north opposed it.

Proposition 2 was one of two $10 billion state bonds on the ballot; the other was Proposition 4 for funding efforts to abate the impact of climate change. Proposition 2 supporters had worried that voters might choose one over the other, but both passed easily.

“What has been clear is that people support it when they understand what Proposition 2 will do and its impact on schools,” said Molly Weedn, spokesperson for a pro-Proposition 2 campaign. “People are seeing the need in real time. When you have a leaky roof, it only gets leakier.”

The campaign, organized by the Coalition for Adequate School Housing (CASH), representing school districts and school construction interests that underwrote the effort, had not yet issued a statement Wednesday.

Even as enrollment in most districts is projected to continue to fall over the next decade, the need for unattended repairs and replacement of aging portable classrooms and buildings has mushroomed. The Center for Cities + Schools at UC Berkeley estimates that 85% of classrooms in California are more than 25 years old; 30% are between 50 and 70 years old, and about 10% are 70 years old or older. 

Climate change has exposed more of the state to unprecedented levels of heat and unhealthy air and underscored the need to replace aging or defective heating and cooling systems.  

The last state bond proposal, in March 2020, coincided with the emergence of Covid-19; anxiety over the virus contributed to its defeat as well as a majority of local districts’ construction bonds. Districts on the rebound from the pandemic were reluctant to ask voters to pass bonds in 2022.

Reflecting a suppressed demand for addressing facilities, a record 252 school districts asked voters on Tuesday to pass local construction bonds totaling $40 billion; an additional 13 community colleges proposed bonds totaling $10.6 billion. Thus, the demand for state help will far exceed the new funding.

Proposition 2, funded by the state’s general fund, needed a simple majority of voters to pass while local school bonds, which require increases in property taxes, require a 55% majority approval. A quick look at some of the larger proposals indicated voters were largely supportive, passing a $9 billion bond in Los Angeles Unified, a $900 million bond in Pasadena Unified and a $1.15 billion bond in San Jose Unified for upgrading facilities, with $283 set aside for housing for staff.

The portion of state funding for school districts will be distributed to projects on a matching basis, with the state contributing 50% of the eligible funding for new construction and 60% of the cost for renovations.

An estimated $3 billion in unfunded school projects from the 2016 bond measure, Proposition 55, will get first dibs at Proposition 2’s new construction and modernization money under the existing rules. Some of these projects have already been completed and will receive the funding retroactively. The rationale is that districts undertook the projects with the expectation that they would eventually receive state aid.

Once Proposition 2 runs out of money, a new line of unfunded projects will be formed for the next state bond. Interest and the principal for Proposition 2 will be repaid from the state’s general fund, at an estimated cost of $500 million per year for 35 years, according to an analysis by the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

How money will be spent

The $10 billion will split as follows:

• $1.5 billion for community colleges
• $8.5 billion for TK-12 districts, allocated as follows:
  • $4 billion for repairs, replacement of portables at least 20 years old, and other modernization work
  • $3.3 billion for new construction
  • $600 million for facilities for career and technical education programs
  • $600 million for facilities for charter schools
  • $115 million to remove lead from school drinking water

The portion of Proposition 2 for community colleges will help renovate existing buildings, construct new classrooms and even replace sewage lines. The chancellor’s office earlier this year already approved 27 projects — totaling about $709 million — that will be covered by the bond measure in a first round of funding. They include projects across the state, from Shasta College in the north to Imperial Valley College near the Mexico border.

Across the college system, with 115 brick-and-mortar community colleges, more than half of the buildings were built more than 40 years ago, said Hoang Nguyen, director of facilities for the system. 

“It’s not like we’re sitting on newer facilities or anything like that. Our campuses are older,” he said. “So this proposition would be of great help.”

The state’s largest district, the Los Angeles Community College District, got approval for four projects in the first round. That includes a new building to house Los Angeles Trade-Tech’s automotive technology, diesel technology and rail systems technology programs, as well as a new kinesiology building at Los Angeles City College. There will also be sewer replacement at Los Angeles Valley and Pierce colleges.

“We’d like to think that our students, if they’re learning in these beautiful new buildings, will feel motivated to complete their training, get their certificates and get an education,” said Leigh Sata, the district’s chief facilities officer.

The portion for TK-12 will set aside 10% of new funding for modernization and new construction for small districts, defined as those with fewer than 2,501 students. It will also expand financial hardship assistance in tiny districts whose tax bases are too low to issue a bond. The state will pick up the full tab for those districts.

The bond will also allow districts to seek supplemental money to build gyms, all-purpose rooms, or kitchens in schools that lack them. But, contrary to the wishes of early education advocates, it won’t dedicate funding to one of the most pressing needs that districts face: adding more classrooms or renovating existing space for transitional kindergarten students.

Except for the set-aside for small districts, Proposition 2 will continue allotting matching money on a first-come, first-served basis, which favors large districts and small, property-wealthy districts with an in-house staff of architects and project managers adept at navigating complex funding requirements.

It also won’t significantly provide a bigger state match for districts with low property values; many lack a large enough tax base to issue bonds to meet basic building needs. Data from the Center for Cities + Schools at UC Berkeley shows that property-wealthy districts, with more taxable property per student, have received a disproportionately higher share of matching state funding over the past 25 years.

One of the system’s outspoken critics is the nonprofit public interest law firm Public Advocates. Its managing partner, John Affeldt, said Wednesday that in passing Proposition 2, “Voters recognized the reality that so many facilities need significant modernization. But I don’t think voters are also aware of and approving the underlying distribution of the bond funds that send so many more dollars to high-wealth districts instead of low-wealth districts.

“We’ll continue to be a voice to make sure the state creates a system that equitably treats all its students,” he said.

EdSource reporter Thomas Peele contributed to the article.

The post California voters say yes to $10 billion school construction bond appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.