By admin 
In the final days of California’s legislative session, a proposal to limit the state superintendent’s power to intervene in school district fiscal crises is circulating at the Capitol — a change that could have immediate consequences for Sacramento City Unified as it faces unprecedented financial distress.
Read more HS football is back. Which Sacramento-area schools are biggest all-time winners?
California County Superintendents, a statewide association representing all 58 county offices of education that oversee school district finances, sent lawmakers a proposal Tuesday to require approval from the State Board of Education president before the state superintendent can assume a county office’s fiscal oversight authority.
“Stripping a county superintendent’s statutory oversight authority is an extraordinary exercise of state power,” the background document read.
“Unilateral state intervention creates the risk that the perspectives of local leaders and communities will be replaced by state politicians.”
The association sent a legislative alert supporting the proposed amendment to all members of both houses. The full background document, reviewed by The Sacramento Bee, was shared more selectively with legislative leaders’ offices, budget and policy committee staff, and the governor’s administration, according to Kindra Britt, a spokesperson for the association.
The development came weeks after Sacramento City Unified made two requests of State Superintendent Tony Thurmond — to overturn the Sacramento County Office of Education’s rescission of the district’s new agreement with its teachers union and to assume some of the county office’s fiscal authority.
The district made the intervention request under Education Code Section 42127.6(k), arguing that the county office’s efforts had been “ineffective” in resolving its financial problems. Although Thurmond rejected the district’s appeal of the rescission, he put the county office on notice regarding the intervention request, warning that he could step in if its future efforts failed to resolve the district’s financial problems.
That provision is what California County Superintendents now wants lawmakers to limit. If the proposed amendment passes, Thurmond would need approval from the president of the State Board of Education — or the president’s designee — before taking over the county office’s duties.
“For 35 years, the Legislature has called upon county offices of education to provide impartial and independent oversight over school district budgeting,” the alert read. “However, an outdated and never-used code section allows a single state official to unilaterally seize oversight duties from local county leaders without any checks-and-balances.”
The proposal cited Assembly Bill 1200, the 1991 law that established county superintendents as the primary fiscal overseers of school districts, and Assembly Bill 1840, which expanded their responsibilities over districts receiving emergency state loans in 2018. It argued that the proposed amendment would protect county officials’ decisions from intervention by state officials who may lack familiarity with local financial conditions or a community’s history.
“County superintendents must be able to make difficult decisions and speak with candor to keep a school district solvent and ensure continuous instruction to students,” the background document continued.
Read more California agency uses workers’ comp funds to probe its employees. What to know
“Requiring concurrence provides an additional safeguard for independent fiscal judgment and reinforces the county superintendent’s role as an objective fiscal oversight authority.”
The association seeks to enact the proposal as urgency legislation, meaning it would take effect immediately if passed and signed into law. It would require two-thirds support in both houses by Aug. 31, the final day lawmakers can pass bills this session.
Opponents warn of new barriers to fiscal review
California County Superintendents has worked with two Sacramento-area lawmakers on the proposal. Sen. Angelique Ashby, D-Sacramento, and Assemblymember Stephanie Nguyen, D-Elk Grove, have been legislative partners in the effort, according to Britt.
The California Teachers Association, however, issued a letter Tuesday urging lawmakers to reject the amendment, arguing that it would make it harder for financially troubled districts to obtain timely state review.
“Requiring an additional concurrence before state officials can act weakens local accountability, causes critical review delays, and interferes with local collective bargaining when county-level fiscal oversight fails to resolve a district’s financial distress,” wrote Bryant Miramontes, legislative advocate with the California Teachers Association.
The teachers association President David Goldberg echoed Miramontes’ concerns, describing the last-minute proposal as “harmful political interference” that would provide no benefit to students.
The rescinded agreement with the Sacramento City Teachers Association was projected to provide Sac City Unified District about $98 million in financial relief over three years, including nearly $68 million that the district planned to draw from a retiree health trust fund to reimburse its general fund for retiree health costs. It also would have extended the teachers’ contract by three years, from June 2027, to June 2030.
Without the agreement, district officials project that Sacramento City Unified could run out of cash by February. If that disputed relief materializes, officials say the district’s cash could last until April, providing additional runway to identify longer-term solutions.
But the Sacramento County Office of Education has firmly defended fiscal adviser Luz Cázares’ decision to rescind the agreement, saying it merely redirected assets and restricted the district’s long-term options by locking in the labor contract for three additional years.
Read more What will fall weather be like in California? ‘El Niño is strengthening’