The 2026-27 Budget: Re-Envisioning State Education Governance

analysis full 2026-27 BUDGET The 2026-27 Budget: Re-Envisioning State Education Governance GABRIEL PETEK | LEGISLATIVE ANALYST | MARCH 2026 SUMMARY Four Core Entities Govern California’s Public School System. The State Board of Education (SBE) is a policymaking body appointed by the Governor that focuses on academic standards. The Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) is an elected official who implements laws and programs as head of the California Department of Education (CDE). The Governor proposes programs and funding allocations through the state budget but has little direct administrative authority. The Legislature approves the Governor’s budget and passes laws, including laws that define the roles and responsibilities of the other governance entities. Current Governance Structure Highly Criticized. Six major studies have examined California’s governance structure over the past 30 years and identified several shortcomings. One main criticism is that the SBE, Governor, and Legislature all rely on the SPI to implement their policies, which may not align with the SPI’s priorities. Conversely, the SPI influences policies through their implementation, but has no formal policy role. The studies concluded that this arrangement often prevents the state from aligning policy and administration and creates confusion for schools about state goals. They also concluded that the public is often unable to discern who is responsible when outcomes are poor and that the Legislature cannot easily hold the other entities responsible for results. Governor Proposes Transferring Management of CDE to an Appointed Commissioner. Under the proposal, an education commissioner appointed by the Governor would assume management of CDE beginning January 1, 2027. The SPI would retain a small office and become a voting member of the SBE and the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges. The proposal does not assign any specific duties to the SPI, but suggests the position could work on coordination and advocacy. The Governor’s budget does not include additional funding for the commissioner position or the SPI’s staff. Proposal Would Promote More Coherent Policymaking. Consolidating administrative authority under the Governor could better align policy development and program administration, reduce disputes among state governance entities, and provide clearer guidance to school districts. The change would also allow for policymakers and the public to hold the Governor accountable for educational outcomes. A Few Issues Merit Greater Attention, Including Oversight, Fiscal Implementation, and the SPI’s Role. Strong legislative oversight is critical to ensuring the Governor exercises authority responsibly and effectively. A key oversight tool in other departments is legislative confirmation of the department head, but the Governor does not propose confirmation for the education commissioner. The proposal also does not include the fiscal changes necessary to implement it. Costs overall could be neutral, but the Legislature will need more detail on the proposed funding levels for CDE, SBE, and the Office of the SPI. Finally, with the absence of explicit duties, the SPI’s role could change significantly depending on the individual holding office. Recommend Adopting Proposal With Refinements. We recommend improving oversight by making the commissioner receive Senate confirmation. Regarding fiscal issues, we recommend directing the administration to submit a fiscal plan to make the shift cost-neutral and identify efficiencies. Regarding the SPI, we recommend authorizing the position to undertake three main activities: (1) representing the interests of the public, (2) reporting on the condition of education and recommending improvements, and (3)evaluating laws and programs. These duties would leverage the SPI’s independence from the Governor to promote oversight. www.lao.ca.gov 1 analysis full 2026-27 BUDGET INTRODUCTION California operates the nation’s largest public responsibilities. The second section reviews school system, comprising 937 school districts, previous governance studies and explains how 1,257 charter schools, and 58 county offices governance works in other contexts. The third of education. This year, these local agencies section describes the Governor’s proposal, will educate nearly 5.8 million students, employ including its core feature: transferring management around 700,000 teachers and staff, and spend of the California Department of Education (CDE) nearly $150 billion. State governance refers to the from the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) structure and duties of the entities that oversee this to a new education commissioner. The fourth system. In this brief, we examine the Governor’s section assesses the merits of this proposal proposal to restructure state governance. The and outlines some principles for re-envisioning first section explains how the current system the SPI’s role. The fifth section provides evolved and describes the main entities and their our recommendations. BACKGROUND Evolution of State Governance Governance Structure Changed Several Times During the State’s Early History. State Education Governance Was a Significant law initially assigned significant responsibilities Issue During California’s Founding. California to the SPI and the SBE, but the relationship had no organized public school system when between these entities changed several times. it gained statehood in 1850. The state’s first For example, delegates to California’s Second constitution laid the foundation for this system Constitutional Convention in 1879 decided to by setting aside land for sale to fund education, decentralize state governance and transferred the establishing the SPI as a statewide elected position, SBE’s duties to county superintendents. Following and requiring public schools to operate for at least this shift, the SPI became the lead actor and three months per year. State law initially gave the the SBE became an advisory body. Over time, SPI responsibility for building schools, overseeing however, the SBE regained significant authority, teacher training institutes, and apportioning state including responsibility for approving textbooks and funds. In 1852, the Legislature created the State credentialing teachers. The voters also approved Board of Education (SBE) to manage other aspects an amendment in 1884 that formally established of the system. The SBE’s initial responsibilities the SBE in the State Constitution. The relationship included approving textbooks, determining required between the SPI and the SBE remained unclear, coursework, and adopting regulations to govern however, and their policymaking roles were public schools. The SBE’s membership varied occasionally disputed. over time, but generally consisted of ex officio members—officials serving by virtue of their Modern Governance Structure Began to office—including the Governor and the SPI, county Emerge in 1912. In 1912, the voters amended superintendents, and the leaders of the state’s the Constitution to remove the SBE’s ex officio teacher training institutes. The state, however, was members and allow the Legislature to determine the far less involved in the public school system than selection process. The Legislature subsequently it is today. For example, elementary education decided to make the SBE consist of the Governor’s did not become compulsory until 1874, and the appointees. The Legislature also sought to clarify state did not begin funding high schools until the relationship between the SPI and the SBE. 1904. Early SPIs had negligible budgets and only Specifically, it made the SBE responsible for a few staff. “all questions of policy” and designated the SPI as 2 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE analysis full 2026-27 BUDGET an administrator who would implement the board’s assessments that measure students’ mastery of the policies. It solidified this structure in 1921 when it standards. Another core responsibility is adopting consolidated the state’s administrative functions regulations when directed by the Legislature. For under a new Department of Education. State law example, after the state adopted the Local Control made the SPI the department’s chief executive but Funding Formula in 2013-14, it directed the board retained the SBE as the department’s policymaking to develop regulations clarifying how districts body. Under this structure, the department and its could spend funds intended to benefit low-income staff (initially 51 employees) became responsible students and English learners. for apportioning state funding, collecting and The SBE Performs Several Other Functions. disseminating data, and administering federal The law allows districts to request waivers from grants, among other duties. These basic features of most parts of the state education code, and the state governance remain in place. SBE is responsible for reviewing and approving these requests. The board also approves certain Current Governance Entities types of district reorganizations, such as when The SBE Is a Policymaking Body Appointed districts wish to merge or consolidate. Another by the Governor. The SBE consists of significant responsibility is hearing appeals when a ten members, serving staggered four-year terms, prospective charter school is denied authorization and one student member, serving a one-year by a school district or county board of education. term. The Governor appoints all 11 members with The SBE also oversees some administrative the approval of two-thirds of the State Senate. functions. For example, it reviews and approves One member of the SBE serves as president and district applications for certain federal grants, presides over meetings, speaks for the board, and officially numbers all new charter schools, and oversees board staff. State law requires the SBE to acts as the state’s liaison to the U.S. Department meet at least six times per year, and these meetings of Education for various federal programs. Staff are subject to open meeting laws. The SBE also from CDE support most of the SBE’s functions has several committees and advisory groups by providing research, analysis, and technical that focus on specific areas such as curriculum, assistance. In addition to these formal duties, the charter schools, special education, and workforce board president and senior staff are typically among pathways. The SBE employs a staff of 16, including the Governor’s most trusted advisors on education an executive director and 6 deputy directors issues and are often tasked with developing and appointed by the Governor. The board’s budget is advancing the Governor’s education agenda in $5.5 million in non-Proposition 98 General Fund. the Legislature. Core SBE Duties Revolve Around Academic The SPI Is an Administrator and Advocate Standards, Curriculum, and Regulations. Many Elected by the Voters. The voters elect the SPI of the SBE’s most significant responsibilities revolve on a nonpartisan statewide ballot every four years. around state academic policies. Specifically, the Like other state offices, the SPI can serve up to two SBE approves academic standards for English, terms. The SPI’s primary responsibility is managing math, and other core subject areas. These CDE (described below). The law also makes the SPI standards define what students should know and a nonvoting “executive officer” of the SBE. In this be able to do in each grade level. The SBE also capacity, the SPI is the SBE’s secretary and must approves guidance for teaching these standards, implement its policies. Additionally, the law makes known as curriculum frameworks. In addition, it the SPI (or the SPI’s designee) a voting member approves instructional materials that align with of several boards and commissions, including the these standards and frameworks. (State law University of California Board of Regents and the does not require districts to use the curriculum California State University Board of Trustees. Outside frameworks or instructional materials approved of these official duties, the SPI typically runs for by the board, but many do.) Related to these office on a policy platform and advocates for those responsibilities, the board reviews and approves priorities in the Legislature. The SPI, for example, www.lao.ca.gov 3 analysis full 2026-27 BUDGET often sponsors bills, meets with school officials, and of the SBE. The Legislature exercises governance testifies at committee hearings. The SPI is assisted by authority by reviewing and approving the Governor’s an executive cabinet, generally comprising up to six budget proposals, enacting education legislation, and deputies whose appointments are confirmed by the confirming the Governor’s appointments to the SBE. SBE and the department’s senior directors. Under the Constitution, the Legislature’s authority CDE Administers Programs, Collects Data, over the public school system and its governance and Conducts Oversight. CDE is the primary state structure is unlimited except where the Constitution entity responsible for administering federal and state itself provides otherwise. The SBE and the SPI, by education programs. In this role, the department contrast, have no powers beyond those expressly allocates funding, collects and reports data, and conferred by the Constitution or state law. monitors district compliance with various laws Many Other Agencies Have Responsibilities (Figure 1). CDE currently employs about 1,500 staff in Specific Areas. The SBE, SPI, Governor, and has a budget of $366 million—$196 million in and Legislature are the four main actors in federal funds, $126 million in non-Proposition 98 state governance, but the law establishes more General Fund, and $44 million in various special than a dozen other agencies with specialized funds. The federal funds include administrative responsibilities. Some of the most important allowances from various grants to cover CDE’s costs include the Commission on Teacher Credentialing of reviewing and approving district grant applications, (sets standards for teacher preparation programs providing technical assistance, and taking corrective and issues teaching credentials), the California action when a district is out of compliance. (Separate Collaborative for Educational Excellence (provides from these functions, CDE operates three special academic support and technical assistance), the schools and three diagnostic centers for students Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team who are blind or deaf. The funding and staff for (provides budget support and fiscal intervention), and these instructional activities are not part of its state the State Allocation Board (allocates school facility administration budget.) funding). Most of these agencies are overseen by The Governor and Legislature Have Major multimember boards that include appointees of the Roles in Governance. The Governor exercises broad Governor, SPI, and Legislature, and/or other state or authority over education governance by proposing local officials. programs and school funding allocations through the annual budget. The Governor also signs or vetoes education legislation and appoints the members Figure 1 Major State Administrative Activities Performed by the California Department of Education • Monitor Compliance. Conduct reviews to ensure districts are following laws and requirements for education programs, including expending funds appropriately. • Compile Data. Collect, summarize, and disseminate fiscal, demographic, and performance information on the state’s districts, schools, and students. • Allocate Funding. Distribute funding to districts and schools based on various laws and formulas. • Provide Information and Training. Inform and train districts on the requirements for education programs and provide technical assistance to districts with poor student outcomes in certain areas. • Facilitate Certain Statewide Initiatives. Support the development of student assessments, school facilities standards, curriculum standards and frameworks, and accountability systems including the California School Dashboard. • Distribute Food. Manage and deliver food to schools that the federal government donates to the state. • Oversee County Offices of Education (COEs). Review and approve COE budgets and Local Control and Accountability Plans. • Support the State Board of Education. Prepare information for board hearings and develop draft regulations for the board to review and adopt. • Manage Internal Administration. Attend to departmental issues such as staffing, budget preparation, information technology, government affairs, and legal services. 4 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE analysis full 2026-27 BUDGET RESEARCH Previous Studies of The voters rejected this measure, as well as three similar amendments in 1934, 1958, and 1968. (The California Governance Legislature considered another measure to make First Major Governance Study Published in the SPI an appointed position in 2023, but this 1920. The state’s first systematic study of governance proposal [ACA 9 by Assembly Member McCarty] was was the Report of the Special Legislative Committee withdrawn by its author.) on Education, published in 1920. (The study is often Six Major Studies Have Examined Governance known as the “Jones Report” after the committee’s Over the Last 30 Years. Since the release of the chair, Senator Herbert Jones.) The report criticized 1920 report, several other legislative committees the division of responsibilities between the SBE and and outside organizations have published the SPI for creating a “double-headed” governance additional governance studies. Over the last structure. It warned that conflict and inefficiency were 30 years, six organizations have published major unavoidable because the two entities had overlapping governance studies that included specific policy responsibilities for governing the public school recommendations (Figure 2). All except one of system. It specifically criticized the system for tasking these studies (the 2025 report by Policy Analysis the SPI with administering policies set by other for California Education) were overseen by boards entities with different policy goals. It recommended or commissions established by the state to make moving toward “unified educational oversight” findings and recommendations on governance by abolishing the elected SPI and transferring and other education-related issues. Their research management of CDE to a new Commissioner of typically involved (1) interviewing state and local Education appointed by the SBE. officials, (2) reviewing the state’s experience with Voters Have Rejected Four Ballot Measures its governance model, (3) examining theories of to Abolish the SPI. The Legislature placed a governance, (4) studying governance in other states, constitutional amendment on the 1928 ballot to (5) analyzing the political and fiscal incentives of implement the Jones Report’s recommendation the main governance entities, and (6) gathering by allowing the Legislature to abolish the SPI. public feedback. Figure 2 Six Major Governance Studies Conducted Over the Past 30 Years Year Organization Publication 1996 California Constitution Revision Commission Final Report and Recommendations to the Governor A commission appointed by the Governor and Legislature to and the Legislature recommend governance reforms and constitutional changes. 2002 The Joint Committee to Develop a Master Plan for Education The California Master Plan for Education A joint committee of the Senate and Assembly charged with making recommendations for a coherent and coordinated approach to education. 2004 California Performance Review A Government for the People for a Change: A Report A commission appointed by the Governor to gather feedback from of the California Performance Review state employees and recommend ideas for improving the delivery of government services. 2007 The Governor’s Committee on Education Excellence Students First: Renewing Hope for California’s Future A group of researchers, state and school officials, advocates, and other public leaders convened to recommend educational reforms. 2008 The Little Hoover Commission Educational Governance and Accountability: Taking An independent oversight agency established to review state the Next Step operations and recommend improvements. 2025 Policy Analysis for California Education TK-12 Education Governance in California: Past, A nonpartisan research center led by faculty at Stanford University, Present, and Future University of California, and University of Southern California, focusing on school performance and equity issues. www.lao.ca.gov 5 analysis full 2026-27 BUDGET Studies Generally Agreed on Core Problems Studies Recommended Making the Governor in State Governance. All six studies concluded the Head of Administrative Functions. The the state’s governance model had fundamental six studies reached a broad consensus that the shortcomings and could be improved. The studies Governor should oversee the implementation also generally agreed on the core problems. and execution of state education policy. Among Specifically, they identified three main issues: other considerations, they concluded that the Governor could align policy and administration • Unclear Lines of Accountability. One more effectively than the SPI, given the consistent criticism was that no one entity Governor’s existing policymaking role. They could be held accountable for educational also concluded that the Governor’s authority quality and results. The studies concluded that over the budget would always provide some none of the main actors could establish clear influence over program administration, such that policy goals and align state administration with assigning administrative duties to another entity those goals. They also expressed concern that could only lead to fragmented governance. The the public does not know who is responsible six studies recommended granting the Governor when outcomes are poor or improvements administrative authority in various ways. Four are needed. As the Governor’s Committee on studies recommended that the Governor (or Education Excellence explained in 2007, “the the Governor’s appointees on the SBE) appoint problem with California’s K-12 governance the head of CDE. A fifth study recommended system is that everyone is in charge, and no creating a new Department of Education and one is accountable.” Workforce Preparation that would report directly • Blurred Responsibilities. The studies to the Governor and absorb some of CDE’s expressed concern that the policymaking coordination and administrative functions. A sixth entities—the Governor, Legislature, and SBE— study recommended leaving most of the existing rely on the SPI to implement their policies, yet governance structure in place—including the the SPI may have been elected with different basic roles of CDE and the SPI—but strengthening priorities. Conversely, the SPI influences policy the Governor’s influence by increasing the by deciding how to administer programs, yet SBE’s oversight of CDE, retaining a Secretary of has no formal policymaking role. Governance Education in the Governor’s office, and making becomes even more blurred in areas where other refinements. the SPI shares authority with one of the Studies Recommended Reducing smaller agencies. As Policy Analysis for or Eliminating the SPI’s Independent California Education explained in 2025, “this Administrative Authority. In tandem with greater fragmented, disjointed structure reflects the gubernatorial control, the studies recommended complexity of California’s TK-12 system, where reducing or eliminating the SPI’s authority to multiple entities operate independently, often administer programs independently of the with overlapping responsibilities.” Governor and the SBE. One study recommended • Muddled Direction to Schools. The studies amending the Constitution to convert the position expressed concern that the entities involved in into an appointee of the Governor. Three studies state governance often send mixed signals to recommended leaving the SPI as a statewide districts. They also expressed concern about elective office but making the position responsible districts falling short of state goals because for oversight and evaluation functions, rather than the state does not align policy, funding, and leading CDE. These studies envisioned the SPI administration to support those goals. As the would analyze programs and policies, report on Joint Committee to Develop a Master Plan the performance of the education system as a for Education explained in 2002, the result is whole, provide advice for the Governor, Legislature, often “confusion for local schools and districts and the public, and advocate for improvements. about what objectives they are expected to (Two of those studies also envisioned the SPI pursue—particularly when the interpretations leading state accountability efforts by compiling and directives from these state entities district performance data, flagging districts for are not always in alignment with or even additional support, and overseeing interventions in complementary to each other.” 6 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE analysis full 2026-27 BUDGET low-performing districts.) Regarding the remaining The superintendent oversees day-to-day operations studies, one recommended retaining the SPI as and implements policies set by the board. This a statewide elected official in charge of CDE, structure does not guarantee a district is well but narrowing CDE’s duties. The other study managed or eliminate conflict, but it clearly defines recommended giving the Governor more authority the local board as the final authority and allows to oversee the SPI’s management of CDE. voters to hold the school board accountable for the Studies Made Different Recommendations district’s performance. on the Role of SBE. Three studies recommended …And From the Governance of Other State retaining the SBE as a policymaking and regulatory Departments. Most other state departments are body. For example, one study recommended that led by a director appointed by the Governor and the board continue approving academic standards confirmed by the Legislature. The director serves at while adjusting its membership to obtain greater the pleasure of the Governor and can be removed geographic diversity. The other three studies when necessary. This structure establishes a clear recommended eliminating most or all of the SBE’s chain of command and allows the voters and the regular policymaking authority. These studies Legislature to hold the Governor and the Governor’s recommended that the SBE (1) become an advisory appointees accountable for the successful body or sounding board for the Governor and the implementation of state programs. head of CDE, and (2) perform limited policymaking California Model Also Differs From Education duties when explicitly directed by the Legislature. Governance in Most Other States. According Most Studies Recommend Additional to the Education Commission of the States, most Governance Reforms. Although the studies states follow one of four education governance generally agreed that the Governor should oversee models. These are summarized in Figure 3. administrative functions, most recommended The most common model includes the Governor additional governance changes. For example, the appointing both the state board of education and California Performance Review recommended the chief state school officer. California is one of eliminating several smaller governance agencies nine states in which the state board of education that operate independently of CDE. The Governor’s is appointed, but the chief state school officer is Committee on Education Excellence recommended elected. In the past decade, one state (Indiana) providing greater autonomy to school districts and has shifted away from California’s model and now deregulating the education code. Policy Analysis appoints its chief state school officer. for California Education recommended establishing regional hubs to coordinate technical assistance and improve linkages between school districts and CDE. Figure 3 Four Common Education Governance Models Governance in Other Number Settings Models of States California’s State Model Governor appoints state board of education and chief state school officer. 14 Differs Notably From Local Governor appoints state board of education. 10 Education Governance… State board of education appoints chief state school officer. Local school districts are led Governor appoints state board of education. 9 by elected boards that oversee Chief state school officer is elected. a superintendent they appoint. State board of education is elected. 7 These boards have the authority State board of education appoints chief state school officer. to change district policies, modify Note: Ten other states use less commonly adopted governance models. superintendent contracts, or Source: Education Commission of the States. remove their superintendents. www.lao.ca.gov 7 analysis full 2026-27 BUDGET GOVERNOR’S PROPOSALS Establishes a New Appointed Commissioner by the SPI and appointed by the SBE as required to Lead CDE. The Governor proposes to establish by the Constitution. The Governor’s budget does the role of an education commissioner, appointed not include additional funding for the Office of the by the Governor, to manage CDE. The proposal SPI. Under the Governor’s proposal, the SPI also would shift management of CDE from the SPI to the becomes a voting member on the SBE and the commissioner on January 1, 2027. CDE’s functions Board of Governors of the California Community would largely remain the same under the education Colleges. For the SBE, the SPI would replace an commissioner’s management. Trailer legislation existing voting member currently appointed by specifies that the education commissioner would the Governor. (The SBE would continue to have be “directly responsible to the SBE and the 11 total members.) For the Board of Governors, the Governor for the operations of the department” and SPI’s membership would increase the number of would serve at the pleasure of the Governor. The members from 18 to 19. proposal also would allow the Governor to appoint Retains Existing Statutory Duties of SBE. up to 16 deputies to support the commissioner. While the Governor’s budget proposes composition The Governor’s budget does not include additional changes to the SBE by making the SPI a voting funding for the commissioner position or its staff. member, it does not propose any other changes. Has the SPI Retain a Small Staff and As such, the SBE would have the same statutory Become a Voting Member of SBE. The Governor roles and responsibilities as it does now. The proposes to create the Office of the SPI. The office Governor also does not propose changes to the would consist of the SPI and up to 11 other staff. other education governance entities that are Of these 11 staff, at least 4 would be nominated currently independent of CDE. ASSESSMENT The Legislature Has Broad Authority to • In the early 1990s, a major disagreement arose Restructure State Governance. The California over the SPI’s authority to issue advisories on Constitution constrains a few aspects of state how districts should implement state laws. governance. Most notably, it establishes the SPI The SBE argued that many of these advisories and the SBE, makes the SPI a statewide elected were “underground regulations” that position, requires the SBE to adopt textbooks undermined its policymaking authority. The for grades one through eight, and requires the SPI defended the advisories as an exercise SBE to approve the SPI’s senior deputies. The of administrative authority. An appellate court Legislature can modify all other aspects of state eventually sided with the SBE. governance, including the responsibilities of the • In the late 1990s, a dispute arose around SPI and SBE, through statute. This brief focuses Proposition 227, a ballot measure requiring on the Governor’s proposal and other governance schools to teach English learners in English changes that the Legislature could adopt without only. The SPI advised districts they had the requiring a constitutional amendment. right to request waivers from the SBE, but the Current Governance Structure Lacks a Clear SBE concluded the measure’s requirements Path for Resolving Disagreements Between were non-waivable. An appellate court SBE and SPI. The SBE and the SPI have disagreed eventually sided with SBE. many times about the extent of their authority or the • In the early 2020s, a charter school appealed meaning of state laws. For example: to the state after its charter was denied by a school district. The SPI, represented 8 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE analysis full 2026-27 BUDGET by CDE staff, concluded that a recent law Governor’s Proposal Would Promote More prevented the state from overturning the Coherent Policymaking. By consolidating school district’s denial of that charter school. policymaking and administrative functions under The SBE, however, approved the appeal the Governor, the proposal could improve state after concluding that the district’s denial governance in several ways. First, it would allow constituted an abuse of discretion that could the Governor to ensure that state policies are be overturned. An appellate court found the implemented in ways that directly align with the SPI’s position more persuasive and invalidated goals agreed upon by the Governor and the the SBE approval following a lawsuit by the Legislature. For example, it would reduce the California School Boards Association. likelihood that policies are diluted through their administration or because the SPI prioritizes The significance of these examples is not simply other policy goals. Second, it would help address that two different entities disagreed about policy, the concern identified in previous studies that but that the governance structure did not provide governance authority is too diffused for anyone to a clear path for resolving these disagreements be held accountable for results. If outcomes are outside of extended litigation. This ambiguity, in poor, the Legislature and the public can attribute turn, left school districts with unclear guidance the results to decisions made by the Governor and on how to interpret and implement state laws. appointees acting on the Governor’s behalf. Third, it Moreover, the Legislature, school districts, and would reduce the likelihood of unresolved disputes the public could not determine which entity to hold among the governance entities. For example, the accountable for the lack of clear state direction. Governor could resolve disagreements that arise Districts Concerned About Clarity and between the SBE and the education commissioner Consistency From the State. We gathered without resorting to litigation. Finally, it would feedback from several district leaders about increase the likelihood that school districts receive governance and their relationship with the state. clear guidance from the state. School leaders They generally agreed that conflict between the SPI could discuss concerns with CDE knowing the and other state entities had declined compared with department is acting on behalf of the entities previous years, but described several longstanding responsible for developing and implementing policy. concerns. One concern was that they sometimes Legislative Oversight Remains Essential. did not know which entity oversaw a particular Many of the potential benefits of the Governor’s issue and could receive feedback or offer advice. proposal could be lost or eroded if the Legislature For example, districts concerned about the does not preserve its oversight role in the new length and complexity of their Local Control and governance system. For example, the proposal Accountability Plans were not sure whether to would align the state’s administrative functions engage with the SBE (which adopts the template for more closely with the Governor’s policies, but the plans) or the SPI’s staff at CDE (the department this alignment does not guarantee that the state provides technical assistance and manages the will administer all programs effectively or that the data that districts are required to include). Another Governor’s policy goals will always have merit. recent example involved ethnic studies. Districts To conduct effective oversight, the Legislature were uncertain whether the state expected them must be able to monitor the implementation of to teach ethnic studies or what content to cover state policies, ascertain whether these policies because the main governance entities expressed align with its priorities, and insist on changes or different opinions for several years. (The SBE and improvements when necessary. Adopting a strong the SPI partially addressed this ambiguity in 2021 oversight role would help the Legislature ensure by agreeing on a model curriculum districts could that as the Governor gains greater authority, this use.) The district leaders believed that clearer, more authority is used responsibly and effectively, consistent guidance from the state would help them and is focused on addressing the state’s most implement local programs more effectively. pressing problems. www.lao.ca.gov 9 analysis full 2026-27 BUDGET The Proposal Could Be Cost Neutral, A Few Core Principles Could Guide Changes but Fiscal Details Are Missing. Recent state to the SPI’s Role. The Governor’s proposal is an governance changes in other program areas have opportunity for the Legislature to consider many led to additional ongoing costs ranging from the changes to the SPI’s role and duties. The previous low millions to tens of millions of dollars per year. governance studies and the state’s experience Some costs were anticipated and approved by with its current governance structure contain the Legislature, but in at least in one case, costs several lessons that could guide a redesign of the arose unexpectedly after the changes took effect. position. Specifically, the Legislature could assess The Governor’s current proposal, however, differs how any changes in the SPI’s role align with the from these other reorganizations in a few important following principles: ways. Most notably, it does not transfer CDE’s • Clearly Specified Duties. Specifying duties functions to another agency, require integration allows voters to hold the SPI accountable for with another agency’s systems, or require staff performing them and reduces the likelihood of to relocate to another building. Moreover, the unresolved conflict between the SPI and other Governor’s proposal likely presents opportunities entities. Additionally, it allows local school for efficiencies, such as eliminating the need for officials seeking guidance from the state to two separate teams dedicated to government know if the SPI should be involved. affairs and policy analysis at CDE and the SBE. • Minimal Fragmentation. Minimizing On the other hand, the proposal would require fragmentation helps the state operate funding a new office for the SPI. Given these efficiently and provide coherent guidance to factors, we think the state could implement the shift schools. The state can minimize fragmentation while keeping overall costs roughly neutral. The by assigning the SPI duties that do not Governor’s budget, however, does not propose any significantly overlap or duplicate those of other specific fiscal changes to implement the proposal governance entities. or identify the new funding levels for CDE, SBE, and • Avoiding Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts of the Office of the SPI. interest arise when the SPI is asked to perform New Role for the SPI Is Not Clearly Defined. duties that are in tension. For example, the The narrative accompanying the Governor’s SPI is sometimes asked to implement policies proposal describes the SPI’s new role as an that do not align with the individual’s priorities. education coordinator and advocate. For the first Additionally, the SPI is sometimes asked to role, it suggests the SPI could “foster needed report on the effectiveness of the programs alignment and coordination of education policies that CDE administers. from early childhood through postsecondary • Leveraging Independence From the education.” For example, the SPI might work on Governor. Leveraging independence dual enrollment policies that allow high school means assigning the SPI duties that can be students to take community college courses, or performed more effectively outside of the on how preschool programs prepare children Governor’s control. For example, the SPI for kindergarten. For the second role, the can provide information or advice about narrative suggests the SPI would be “California’s an educational issue even if the Governor independently elected education champion.” considers it a low priority. For example, the SPI could spend more time sponsoring legislation, advocating before the Legislature, and representing the public’s interest in education issues. The trailer legislation, however, does not codify any specific duties. Without statutory direction, the SPI’s role could change significantly depending on the individual holding office. 10 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE analysis full 2026-27 BUDGET RECOMMENDATIONS California Department of Education and the proposal to create a new office for the SPI but modify the trailer bill language to clearly define Education Commissioner the SPI’s duties. Specifically, we recommend the Adopt Proposal to Transfer Management Legislature re-envision the SPI as an advisor and of CDE to Appointed Commissioner. We evaluator who would be authorized to undertake recommend adopting the Governor’s proposal three main activities: to shift the management of CDE to an education commissioner appointed by the Governor. This • Representing the Interests of the Public. change would promote greater coherence The SPI could focus its work on specific areas in policymaking, including clearer lines of that align with the greatest interest of the accountability and better alignment between policy public. The SPI was presumably chosen by development and administration. This change also the public because they found this individual’s could result in clearer direction and support for policy platform compelling. In this charge, school districts. the Office of the SPI could focus on the SPI’s most pressing priorities. Topics could include Require the Legislature to Approve the technology use in schools, teacher training, Commissioner’s Appointment. To provide greater early education, or transitions from high legislative oversight of CDE, we recommend the school to college. education commissioner be subject to the Senate confirmation process. This process would provide • Reporting on the State of Education. As key legislative oversight for the selection of the an independently elected public official, the education commissioner, as is currently the case SPI is uniquely positioned to report on the with most other heads of state departments. condition of education in the state. The SPI Through the confirmation process, the Legislature may travel across the state as part of their could better understand the commissioner’s duties and speak with interested parties of credentials, past employment history, and key the education community. This would help priorities for leading the department. This process the SPI to understand and report on key also allows school leaders and the public to provide education issues, major challenges, and input on the selected individual. significant trends that affect education in California. In these reports, the SPI could Insist on Fiscal Efficiencies. Given the make recommendations to address major current condition of the state budget, the state is challenges identified. not positioned to provide discretionary, ongoing non-Proposition 98 General Fund increases as was • Evaluating Laws and Programs. The done for other recent reorganization efforts. We SPI could also report to the Legislature, recommend requiring the Governor to propose a Governor, and broader public on existing laws plan that maintains overall spending across CDE, and programs. In this work, the SPI would the SBE, and the new Office of the SPI at roughly offer recommendations for areas that need the same level. This could include consolidating or improvement. The SPI could identify specific shifting staff without backfilling positions. We also laws and programs to evaluate based on recommend the plan identify areas of redundancy public feedback and the Office of the SPI’s across the SBE and CDE where duties will expertise. Alternatively, the Legislature could be consolidated. direct the SPI to evaluate specific issues. This could involve assuming responsibility Office of the State Superintendent for some program evaluations currently Re-Envision the SPI as a Public assigned to CDE. Representative, Advisor and Independent Evaluator. We recommend the Legislature adopt www.lao.ca.gov 11 analysis full 2026-27 BUDGET Codifying these activities would clearly define the board could continue to approve and oversee the scope of the position, while still allowing the SPI academic standards after gathering input from to focus on activities aligned with their education teachers, administrators, researchers, parents, priorities. To maintain clear lines of accountability advocates, and other members of the public. and avoid fragmentation, the SPI would not be Similarly, the SBE could continue to oversee charter involved in administering policies, enforcing state school appeals and school district reorganizations or federal laws, or providing technical support. because the Legislature has prioritized public Adopting this approach would give the SPI a set of input for those decisions. We also recommend duties in which independence from the Governor is shifting administrative functions to the new a clear strength and help the Legislature perform its commissioner. For example, the commissioner role of overseeing the state’s education system. could directly number new charter schools, Adopt Proposals to Give the SPI Voting Rights approve district applications for federal grants, and on SBE and Community College Governing represent the state before the U.S. Department Board. We recommend adopting the proposals of Education. This shift would free up the SBE to to make the SPI a voting member of the SBE and focus on broader policy issues while making state Board of Governors of the California Community administrative functions more efficient. Colleges. Providing the SPI with voting membership Considering Adding Legislative Appointees on these boards could help ensure the SPI has to the SBE. The Legislature could consider access to information and can represent the adding two legislative appointees to the SBE. public. The SPI would also be able to monitor the These appointees could enable greater legislative implementation of their recommendations across oversight of the new governance system and ensure the education spectrum. the SBE’s policies are consistent with legislative intent. Additionally, they could help ensure the State Board of Education SBE and the commissioner remain responsive Refine the SBE’s Role to Focus on Major to legislative requests for data or information. Policies Requiring Public Input. We recommend If the Legislature takes this approach, it could refining the SBE’s duties to focus on broad either expand the SBE or reduce the number of policy issues where public input and diverse gubernatorial appointees. In either case, it would perspectives are especially important. As a likely want separate appointments for the Assembly body with regular meetings, multiple members, and Senate so that each house could choose a and several subcommittees, the SBE is better board member to represent its interests. positioned to gather public input than a single individual like the commissioner. For example, CONCLUSION State Governance Is Ripe for Reform. The 100 years ago. The Governor’s proposal provides state has been debating education governance an opportunity to consider structural changes since California gained statehood in 1850. Over the that would address some of these longstanding past three decades, six major studies have critiques. It also highlights the central role of criticized the system for lacking cohesion and the Legislature in defining the other governance failing to clarify who is responsible for educational entities’ roles. performance. Many of these critiques center on Some Logistical Details Will Need to Be the roles of the SBE and the SPI, which are clear in Addressed. A large-scale governance change theory but often murky in practice. Despite these will require many smaller changes to existing laws calls for reform, the state continues to operate with and administrative practices. The Legislature and the same basic structure it established more than administration will need to address these details 12 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE analysis full 2026-27 BUDGET to ensure a seamless transition to a new system. Governor’s Proposal Is Not a Panacea… For example, the education code will need to be Implementing the Governor’s budget proposal amended to shift the SPI’s duties to the education would address one of the most criticized features of commissioner. New positions in the SBE, CDE, California’s education system. Many other issues, and the SPI will have to be created, others deleted, however, will continue to merit additional attention and responsibilities defined. The Legislature will from the Legislature. For example, the state will need to develop practices for working with the new still need to work towards improving student commissioner and redefine its relationship with achievement, addressing the fiscal and academic the SPI. It will also need to ensure it continues to problems of struggling districts, clearly defining its receive data from CDE, potentially by codifying educational goals, and improving its teacher and statutory reporting requirements or adopting administrative workforce. supplemental reporting language. Other issues …But Could Make Other Problems Easier to may arise as the transition proceeds. Many of these Address. Adopting the new governance structure changes will need to occur as a new Governor and would allow for voters to hold the Governor new SPI are taking office. The complexity of the accountable for change, reduce confusion about transition, however, is not by itself a reason to avoid who is in charge, and improve oversight of existing making improvements. programs. Our recommended refinements would Further Governance Changes Could Be help the Legislature ensure the Governor uses this Warranted. The Governor’s proposal makes a new authority effectively and responsibly. Even significant change to state governance, but it does if these changes do not automatically solve the not implement many of the other recommendations state’s other longstanding education challenges, made by previous studies. Focusing on the SPI, they would allow the Legislature to set goals and however, could be a reasonable starting point. monitor results in ways that make them easier to This approach would allow the Legislature to address in the future. provide oversight and ensure the transition is successful before addressing other governance concerns. In the future, the Legislature could explore whether additional changes are necessary. www.lao.ca.gov 13 analysis full 2026-27 BUDGET APPENDIX: KEY CALIFORNIA GOVERNANCE STUDIES Listed in chronological order of publication: Governor’s Committee on Education Special Legislative Committee on Education. Excellence. (2007). “Students First: Renewing Hope (1920). “Report of the Special Legislative for California’s Future.” Committee on Education.” Digitized in 2007 by the Milton Marks “Little Hoover” Commission on Internet Archive from the collection of the University California State Government Organization and of California, Los Angeles. Economy. (2008). “Educational Governance & California Constitution Revision Commission. Accountability: Taking the Next Step.” (1996). “Final Report and Recommendations to Policy Analysis for California Education. (2025). the Governor and the Legislature.” Online version “TK-12 Education Governance in California: Past, provided by the Golden Gate University School Present, and Future.” of Law. Studies can be accessed on our website in the Joint Committee to Develop a Master Plan for online version of this report. Education. (2002). “The California Master Plan for Education.” California Performance Review. (2004). “A Government for the People for a Change: A Report of the California Performance Review.” Volume I (Prescription for Change), Volume II (Form Follows Function), Volume IV Chapter 3 (Education, Training and Volunteerism), Volume IV Chapter 8 (Issues and Recommendations: Education, Training Volunteerism). 14 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE analysis full 2026-27 BUDGET www.lao.ca.gov 15 analysis full 2026-27 BUDGET LAO PUBLICATIONS This report was prepared by Sara Cortez and Kenneth Kapphahn, and reviewed by Edgar Cabral and Ross Brown. The Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) is a nonpartisan office that provides fiscal and policy information and advice to the Legislature. To request publications call (916) 445-4656. This report and others, as well as an e-mail subscription service, are available on the LAO’s website at www.lao.ca.gov. The LAO is located at 925 L Street, Suite 1000, Sacramento, California 95814. 16 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE