Zaidee Stavely
Gov. Gavin Newsom’s latest education budget proposal for 2026-27 received mixed reviews from education leaders and advocates.
Many applauded Newsom’s proposed increases to special education funding, but school districts and teachers unions continue to protest the governor’s plan to withhold billions in overall funding. Some advocacy organizations also called for increased funding for English learners and subsidized childcare for low-income families.
Here’s what they had to say.
‘Historic’ special education funding
Newsom’s proposed $2.4 billion increase in state funding for students with disabilities, up from the $509 million he proposed in January, was largely hailed as “historic.”
School districts have long said that they don’t have enough funding from the federal and state governments to cover special education expenses, which they are required to provide under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The federal government has never fulfilled its promise to provide 40% of funding for students with disabilities; it currently provides less than 13%.
“The federal government has consistently failed to meet its funding obligations, leaving California and other states alone to close critical gaps and leaving too many students with disabilities without the support they deserve,” said Assembly Education Committee Chair Darshana Patel, D-San Diego. “This historic $2.4 billion investment in special education will better serve students with disabilities and the educators who support them.”
Anjanette Pelletier, director of management consultant services at School Services of California, said the new rate “is aligned with funding needed for special education as advocated by statewide organizations … to reflect increases in statewide incidence of students with disabilities and rising costs.”
Advocates call for more funding for English learners, childcare
Several advocacy organizations applauded the governor’s funding for community schools, which provide wraparound services for children, dual enrollment (college classes for high school students), and literacy and math instruction.
But early education advocates were frustrated by the governor’s reduction to a cost-of-living adjustment for subsidized childcare and preschool.
“The 30% reduction to the childcare COLA, combined with lack of funding to bring childcare slots to mandated levels, sends a troubling signal to providers who are already operating on the margins,” said Patricia Lozano, executive director of Early Edge California.
As transitional kindergarten has expanded, many preschool programs are struggling to survive, and providers and advocates have called for support that they say the governor has overlooked.
“The governor seems to ignore the nation’s intensifying worry over the affordability of raising children,” said Bruce Fuller, UC Berkeley emeritus professor. “This will erode the quality of care and preK for middling families as well.”
There were also calls to increase funding for English learners, bilingual education and teacher preparation.
Martha Hernandez, executive director of Californians Together, said the organization is advocating for more funding for teacher training to help students learn English and on bilingual instruction, through the Educator Workforce Investment Grant, and the California Newcomer Education and Well-Being (CalNEW) program, which provides support for recent immigrant students and their families.
“With federal funding currently at risk, ongoing state investment is essential to protect these vulnerable communities and provide them with culturally responsive support,” Hernandez said.
Marshall Tuck, CEO of the nonprofit EdVoice, commended the governor for $17.8 million in new funding for the Golden State Teacher Grant (GSTG) program and restoring grants of $20,000 for special education teachers who commit to spending four years in “high-needs schools,” but said it isn’t enough.
“Historically, GSTG has operated with an average annual budget of approximately $100 million. We urge the Governor and Legislature to invest as close to that level as possible so more students in high-needs schools have access to qualified teachers,” Tuck said.
Heather Kirkpatrick, CEO and president of Alder Graduate School of Education, had a similar opinion.
“While we appreciate the federal funds supporting Golden State Teacher Grants for special education, we must also address critical shortages in bilingual and high-poverty schools.”
Christopher J. Nellum, executive director of EdTrust-West, said the governor’s proposal “makes important progress” and it is now the Legislature’s job to make sure the final budget does the same.
“Progress depends on whether these investments are protected and targeted to the students who need them the most,” Nellum said. “Students from low-income families, multilingual learners and students of color cannot afford to see these commitments diluted in the final budget.”
A dissenting view
For Lance Christensen, head of policy for the California Policy Center, a conservative nonprofit think tank, the governor’s proposed education funding falls short because it isn’t tied to student outcomes.
“His so-called ‘investments’ are not producing results where our children are literate or numerate,” Christensen said. “He has presented large numbers for increasing special education, paid pregnancy leave, community schools. What was missing was whether those dollars would produce better outcomes for our children.”
“It’s just duct tape on old duct tape,” he said.
Missing from the governor’s budget presentation, Christensen said, was any mention of the Trump administration’s program to provide new nonrefundable tax credits to fund scholarship-granting organizations. Recently, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul announced that New York would join more than 30 other states in the new federal private school choice program.
“That would bring billions of dollars into our school system, whether it is private, public and charter,” Christensen said.
Teachers unions, school boards still frustrated over withheld funding
Newsom has insisted he needs to withhold some funding from schools and community colleges until early 2027 to make sure increased state revenue comes through. In January, he had said he would withhold $5.6 billion. In his May revision, he decreased the number to $3.9 billion.
The state school boards association, teachers unions and school district leaders still say they need the funding now.
David Roth, superintendent of the Buckeye Union School District, which serves the Folsom area, and organizer of the Raise the Base Coalition, which advocates for increased “base operating funding” for school districts, called the governor’s May revision a “very welcome improvement compared to the governor’s January proposal.” He cited, in part, the base increase to special education. But he said the proposal does not fully address the withholding from Proposition 98, and that the governor’s proposed 14 weeks of pregnancy leave for teachers will eat into the increased funding from COLA.
“That new expense, coupled with declining enrollment, means many districts will net something less year over year than the 4.13% that will be cited,” Roth said.
“The governor’s proposed budget revision clearly ignores the will of voters by proposing to withhold $3.9 billion from California’s constitutionally guaranteed Prop. 98 funding minimum,” said David Goldberg, president of the California Teachers Association. “We are living in an era of unprecedented wealth, where the rich continue to get richer as the rest of us struggle to make ends meet. The governor and Legislature have the power to ensure the wealthy and corporations pay their fair share and raise revenue to fully fund schools and communities.”
Jeff Freitas, president of the California Federation of Teachers, or CFT, agreed.
“We stand firm in our demand that Proposition 98 be fully funded,” Freitas said. “CFT will continue to fight for long-term revenue solutions that protect education funding in good years and in bad — because the strength of our public schools should never depend on the whims of a revenue forecast, or the greed of billionaires.”
EdSource staff contributed to this report.
