Your donation will help us produce journalism like this. Please give today.

During a debate this month, the two candidates vying to become California’s Superintendent of Public Instruction exchanged barbs over every question that was posed: Their performance as school board members, parental rights, Title IX and college readiness. 

But asked separately by The 74 about proposals to reform the state’s education funding formula, Democrat Richard Barrera and Republican Sonja Shaw agreed things need to change.

Barrera, president of the San Diego Unified School Board, said the change — which would shift funding from daily student attendance to enrollment  —  would give districts “a more predictable base for multiyear planning.” Shaw, who is president of the Chino Valley Unified School Board, agreed. “Districts are expected to be ready every day whether kids show up or not.” 

California is one of only six states (with Idaho, Texas, Missouri, Mississippi and Kentucky) that includes daily student attendance in the formula for base district funding. But as enrollment steadily tanks, a growing number of education leaders are pushing for a switch to an enrollment-based formula. 

Changing the formula so California aligns with most states is not a new idea, and it has yet to gain legislative traction. That’s because the idea has been “oversold” as a solution to declining enrollment, said Carrie Hahnel, a partner at the education policy research firm Bellwether. 

“The reality is that whether we count students by enrollment or attendance there are fewer of them, so we need a broader solution,” she said. Short-term increases in funding for some districts wouldn’t last, Hahnel said, or be worth the money and effort to create and pass the necessary legislation. 

“The question is: Is the juice worth the squeeze?” said Hahnel, who has researched ways that districts can adapt to declining enrollment. 

California implemented a “minimum guarantee” model in 1988, called Prop. 98, which uses a complex formula to determine funding for schools and community colleges. Prop. 98 funding comes from state revenue and property taxes and education gets a guaranteed cut of about 40 percent of that pie every year. The remainder is divided up between dozens of programs including special education, art, music and community schools. 

Because that funding commitment is in place, Hahnel said, switching from attendance to enrollment won’t make that much difference.

“The funding gains are not going to be there in the way people think,” said Hahnel. “The amount of money districts get from other sources like categorical grants would have to shrink. At the end of the day, the same amount of revenue would be distributed.”

This year’s race for Superintendent of Public Instruction is uncharacteristically political and heated, in spite of the fact that the job was stripped of its power in a recent deal between the governor and legislature. The governor California elects in November will appoint a commissioner to run the department of education, which used to be the superintendent’s job.

But that barely came up as the two candidates sparred recently. Barrera accused Shaw of “taking a page right out of Donald Trump’s playbook” when she supported her district’s legal challenge of California’s 2024 law preventing districts from notifying parents when a student changes their pronouns at school. 

“Sonja claims to be about improving student outcomes,” Barrera said during the debate, “but all she talks about is capitulating to the Trump administration and discriminating against our kids, rolling over when Trump cuts money from our schools. It’s all about the culture wars. That’s not where our focus needs to be.”

When asked how she will persuade voters in solidly Democratic California to vote for her, Shaw invoked the legal battle over whether Title IX protects trans athletes. “Democrats want their kids to succeed. They don’t want secrets being kept from them and they definitely don’t want their daughters violated in locker rooms,” she said. 

Shaw insisted that people who align her with the current administration have “Trump Derangement Syndrome,” and that she was “concerned” about Barrera’s mental health. “We should get you some help,” she said.

Both candidates argue their experience as district board members uniquely qualifies them for the state superintendent role. Barrera, who was elected as a board member in 2008 and has a background in community organizing, cites increases in graduate rates, declining absenteeism and gains in college and career readiness under his 18 years. Shaw was elected to the Chino Valley board in 2022 and previously owned a fitness center. She points to the district’s high test scores and graduation rates.

Shaw states proudly that she never planned on running for office but felt compelled by what she sees as abysmal performance by California schools. She is running as an outsider who is outraged by a failing public education system. 

“Right now, we’re offering a really horrible product,” she said. “It’s a cry for help from our families. You see a mass exodus out of the public education system.”

At one point during the debate she blamed the cost of labor agreements with San Diego Unified teachers for declines in student enrollment.

“There’s a reason why kids are exiting San Diego Unified,” she said, listing teacher raises and proposed lay-offs that were later rescinded as problems that Barrera has helped create.

Barrera replied that Shaw was “demonstrating a complete lack of understanding” of the issues.

“Declining enrollment is not about families choosing to leave our public schools,” he said. “We have lower birth rates. We have higher housing costs, which is forcing families with school aged kids out of our communities, and we’ve got Trump’s assault on immigration, which is frightening families.”

California lost nearly 75,000 students in 2025 alone, and districts in nearly all regions of the state expect numbers to continue to drop over the next decade. Meanwhile, rates of chronic absenteeism have declined steadily since 2021 but still hovered just below 20 percent, or more than one million students last year. 

With numbers like these it is understandable that leaders want to examine the attendance-based formula. Tony Thurmond, the current Superintendent of Public Instruction, said it is time for the state to adopt a system that provides “stable funding based on enrollment.” Thurmond’s term ends in January. He lost in the March primary to Barrera.

Previous attempts to pass legislation have either failed in committee or been watered down to simply study the issue. This resulted in a state Legislative Analyst’s Office report which found that switching to an enrollment-based model would mean committing some $6 billion to districts, rather than giving legislators the flexibility to choose where to put the money. The report ultimately concluded that while changing to an enrollment-based model might create “somewhat more predictable” funding, it might also have a “negative effect on student attendance in the long run.”

“Shifting away from [attendance-based] funding could hinder efforts to improve attendance and reduce chronic absenteeism levels in schools,” the Legislative Analyst’s Office wrote. 

The argument that districts would be disincentivized to increase attendance doesn’t persuade Carrie Hahnel.

“When you talk to districts and school sites, many kind of bristle at that idea,” she said. “They say they want students there because their goal and purpose is to support student learning.”

In an email to The 74 Shaw said that the root of the absenteeism problem is that “parents have lost trust because too many schools are not delivering on strong academics or safe campuses. Changing the funding formula without addressing that failure just papers over the problem,” she said, “and lets districts collect money for students they are not successfully educating.”

Barrera, who serves as a senior policy advisor for special projects for the state department of education, convened a panel of district leaders to discuss ways the state can address attendance and enrollment. During a recent webinar hosted by Thurmond, Barrera said changing the funding formula is just one way education leaders can address these challenges. Revenues coming into California are growing, even as the number of students declines. 

“This presents a generational opportunity,” he said, “to think about how we can invest more in the students that we have.”