Contact for interviews:  GCI – Ellen Bilbrey (602) 432-7941 or Jim Mapstead at (602) 380-5768

The Grand Canyon Institute (GCI) Opposes Proposition 320 as it offers the wrong solutions to improve Arizona’s public schools. This proposal would impose a rigid requirement that certain public-school districts spend at least 60% of their operational budgets on “direct instructional expenses.” Districts that fall short would have to increase that percentage every year—or face escalating reductions in their state Classroom Site Fund dollars.

But here is the glaring inequity: Proposition 320 does not impose this 60% spending mandate on charter schools or private schools. The restrictions are aimed at traditional public-school districts.

The problem is simple!  Running a school takes more than putting a teacher in a classroom. The measure could force districts to shift money away from counselors, nurses, social workers, librarians, security, transportation, maintenance, technology and other services that students and teachers depend on every day.If districts cannot make the required shift, the state can reduce their Classroom Site Fund allocation by 25% each year they remain out of compliance, subject to limited waivers. Proposition 320 doesn’t give public schools more money. It tells local school boards how to spend the money they already have—and threatens to take money away if don’t comply.

Arizona should not impose a one-size-fits-all spending mandate on traditional public schools while charter and private schools are exempt from the same requirement.  Proposition 320 creates an unfair double standard. It takes away local control by imposing a rigid spending mandate and financial penalties on traditional public-school districts while charter schools and private schools are not subject to the same requirement. The Grand Canyon Institute opposes Proposition 320 and urges Arizona voters to reject it.  For more detailed research data about schools and Arizona’s budget crisis, go to www.GrandCanyonInstitute.org