摘要：California school districts are facing major financial crises pending budget decisions from the state. Numbers range from large to enormous with schools potentially losing as much as 10% of their general fund. This requires judicious analysis of current expenditures, programs, and allocations. As a result, districts must have the flexibility to decide how best to allocate their scarce resources. Local decision-making power is crucial to financial solvency and survival. The current categorical structure ties the hands of local educational agencies. To deal with the current crisis the strings must be removed from categorical monies, empowering districts to make decisions that meet local goals and priorities. According to Sack (2003, January 22) the current categorical spending of $11.03 billion accounts for nearly a third of all state education spending. Historically, categorical funds have served the purpose of addressing special needs and conditions for public school students. Opponents of block grants argue that while block grants would bring freedom and flexibility, the plan comes with a hefty price. As O’Brien (2000, May) argues, block grants require less accountability. Therefore, since there appears to be no direct correlation between student achievement and funding this could result in reduced funding over time. Block grant opponents further argue that the loss of targeted categorical funding would mean that schools would face no legislated obligation to provide for specific areas of need. As a result, those who have historically been under-funded might return to times of greater inequity and an ever widening achievement gap.
