Re: Question 1 - Funding Model

I'm not sure that it's a good idea to give a state bureaucracy the power to determine how much it would cost to provide an "adequate" education to students throughout California.  There are a bevy of complex variables that would obfuscate a true determination of adequacy.  Moreover, even among geographically similar areas, there are significant differences in school districts that would make such an approach exceedingly difficult.

I also believe that the Commission should be mindful of the per-pupil amount that California gets in comparison to other states and respective performance levels.  In other words, the relative return on our investment should be a consideration, and should be inline with what other states are accomplishing.  Granted, while there are unique challenges that California faces, we need to make sure that we don't automatically equate relatively more money with greater performance.  Some states manage to do more with less, and we should determine how they do it and emulate their efficiency.

If funding on the basis of a quality education will cost more, the state will have to measure the benefits from the expected gain against other priorities that are also important.  But, again, it's important that we don't fall into the trap of throwing money at a troubled system in the hopes that its flaws will just disappear.