Paying for financial expertise: privatization policies and shifting state responsibilities in the school facilities industry

References

• Arsen, D., and T. Davis. 2006. “Taj Mahals or Decaying Shacks: Patterns in Local School Capital Stock and Unmet Capital Need.” Peabody Journal of Education 81 (4): 1–22.
   Google Scholar
• Baker, B., and P. Green. 2008. “Conceptions of Equity and Adequacy in School Finance.” In Handbook of Research in Education Finance and Policy, edited by H. F. Ladd and E. B. Fiske, 203–221. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ball, S. J. 2007. Education PLC: Understanding Private Sector Participation in Public Sector Education. London: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Bonds: School Districts and Community College Districts, Assembly Bill 182. 2013. Chapter 477 (Cal. Stat. 2013).
   Google Scholar
• Bowers, A. J., and J. Lee. 2013. “Carried or Defeated? Examining the Factors Associated with Passing School District Bond Elections in Texas, 1997–2009.” Educational Administration Quarterly 49 (5): 732–767.10.1177/0013161X13486278
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brimley, V. R., D. A. Verstegen, and R. R. Garfield. 2012. Financing Education in a Climate of Change. 11th ed. Upper Saddle River: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Brunner, E. J. 2006. Financing School Facilities in California: Report of the Governor’s Committee on Education Excellence. Palo Alto: Stanford University, Institute for Research on Education Policy and Practice . https://cepa.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/6-Brunner(3-07).pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Bulkley, K. E., and P. Burch. 2011. “The Changing Nature of Private Engagement in Public Education: For-Profit and Nonprofit Organizations and Educational Reform.” Peabody Journal of Education 86 (3): 236–251.10.1080/0161956X.2011.578963
   Google Scholar
• Bulkley, K. E., J. Henig, and H. Levin, eds. 2010. Between Public and Private: Politics, Governance, and the New Portfolio Models for Urban School Reform. Cambridge: Harvard Education Press.
   Google Scholar
• Burch, P. 2009. Hidden Markets: The New Education Privatization. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Burch, P. 2010. “After the Fall: Educational Contracting in the USA and the Global Financial Crisis.” Journal of Education Policy 25 (6): 757–766.10.1080/02680939.2010.508182
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• California Debt and Investment Advisory Commission. California K-12 School District Debt. Accessed April 15, 2015. http://www.treasurer.ca.gov/cdiac/debtdata/entity.asp.
   Google Scholar
• California Department of Education. 2011. Schools of the Future Report. Sacramento: California Department of Education. http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/fa/sf/documents/sotfreport.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• California Department of Education. 2017. Fingertip Facts on Education in California. Sacramento: California Department of Education. https://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sd/cb/ceffingertipfacts.asp.
   Google Scholar
• California Department of Education, California P-16 Council. 2008. Closing the Achievement Gap: Report of Superintendent Jack O’Connell’s California P-16 Council. Sacramento: California Department of Education. http://www.cde.ca.gov/eo/in/pc/documents/yr08ctagrpt0122.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• California Department of Education, School Facilities Planning Division. 2006. Healthy Children Ready to Learn: Facilities Best Practices. Sacramento: California Department of Education. http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/fa/sf/documents/healthychildren.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Coalition for Adequate School Housing. 2007. “Building and Leading the Facility Team.”PowerPoint presented at a workshop of the Coalition for Adequate School Housing, Sacramento, March 27.
   Google Scholar
• Coalition for Adequate School Housing. 2017. Some Facts about California’s Public School System. Sacramento: Coalition for Adequate School Housing. https://www.cashnet.org/cps-facts/index.html.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. 1999. School Facility Financing: A History of the Role of the State Allocation Board and Options for the Distribution of Proposition 1A Funds (CRB 99–01). Sacramento: California Research Bureau.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, T. E. 2015. “State and Federal Policies for School Facility Construction: A Comparison of Michigan and Ohio.” Educational Administration Quarterly 51 (1): 3–26.10.1177/0013161X13508773
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeBray-Pelot, E., and P. McGuinn. 2009. “The New Politics of Education: Analyzing the Federal Education Policy Landscape in the Post-NCLB Era.” Educational Policy 23 (1): 15–42.10.1177/0895904808328524
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Department of Finance. 2015. 2015–2016 Governor’s Budget Summary. Sacramento: Department of Finance. http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/2015-16/pdf/BudgetSummary/FullBudgetSummary.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Donahue, J. D. 1989. The Privatization Decision: Public Ends. Private Means: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Edsall, T. B., and M. D. Edsall. 1992. Chain Reaction: The Impact of Race, Rights, and Taxes on American Politics. New York: WW Norton & Company.
   Google Scholar
• Ely, T., and T. Calabrese. 2013. " To Give is to Get: The Promotional Role of Investment Bankers in School District Bond Elections." Paper presented at the meeting for the Association of Education Finance and Policy Conference, New Orleans, February.
   Google Scholar
• Evans, W. 2012. ‘Bond Firms’ Campaign Gifts Linked to Sales Pacts.’ SFGate, May 6. http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Bond-firms-campaign-gifts-linked-to-sales-pacts-3537783.php.
   Google Scholar
• Filardo, M. 2010. State Capital Spending on PK-12 School Facilities. Washington, DC: 21st Century School Fund.
   Google Scholar
• Filardo, M. 2016. State of Our Schools: America’s K-12 Facilities 2016. Washington, DC: 21st Century School Fund.
   Google Scholar
• Filardo, M., J. M. Vincent, P. Sung, and T. Stein. 2006. Growth and Disparity: A Decade of US Public School Construction. Washington, DC: 21st Century School Fund.
   Google Scholar
• Frazier, C. L., and M. Hulsizer. 2013. Letter to Paul Fong, Chair of the Assembly Elections and Redistricting Committee, April 30 [Unpublished letter].
   Google Scholar
• Frederickson, H. G., K. B. Smith, and C. Larimer. 2003. The Public Administration Theory Primer. Boulder: Westview Press.
   Google Scholar
• General Obligation Bonds, California Government Code. Article 4.5 § 53506–53509.5.
   Google Scholar
• Giroux, H. A. 1999. “Schools for Sale: Public Education, Corporate Culture, and the Citizen-Consumer.” The Educational Forum 63 (2): 140–149.10.1080/00131729908984404
   Google Scholar
• Hanak, E. 2009. Paying for Infrastructure: California Choices. Sacramento: California Public Policy Center . http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/atissue/AI_109EHAI.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Handler, J. F. 1996. Down from Bureaucracy: The Ambiguity of Privatization and Empowerment. Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400821983
   Google Scholar
• Harrington, G., J. Hartenstein, and D. Field. 2005. The XYZs of California School District Debt Financing. 3rd ed. San Francisco: Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP . https://www.orrick.com/Events-and-Publications/Documents/1151.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Harvey, J. 2012. “Privatization: A Drain on Public Schools.” Educational Leadership 69 (4): 48–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hatry, H. P. 1983. A Review of Private Approaches for Delivery of Public Services. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Honig, M. I. 2004. “The New Middle Management: Intermediary Organizations in Education Policy Implementation.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 26 (1): 65–87.10.3102/01623737026001065
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hursh, D. W. 2016. The End of Public Schools: The Corporate Reform Agenda to Privatize Education. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ingle, W. K., P. A. Johnson, M. R. Ryan Givens, and J. Rampelt. 2013. “Campaign Expenditures in School Levy Referenda and Their Relationship to Voter Approval: Evidence from Ohio, 2007–2010.” Leadership and Policy in Schools 12 (1): 41–76.10.1080/15700763.2013.766347
   Google Scholar
• Jensen, R.. 2012. ‘Some California FAs Use Pay-to-Play Tactics, Critics Say.’ The Bond Buyer, May 24. http://www.bondbuyer.com/issues/121_101/critics-california-financial-advisor-campaign-consultant-pay-to-play-1040119-1.html.
   Google Scholar
• Kelman ,S. J.2002. “ Contracting.” In The Tools of Government: A Guide to the New Governance, edited by L. M.Salamon,282–318. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kettl, D. F. 1993. Sharing Power: Public Governance and Private Markets. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Legislative Analyst’s Office. 2015. Letter to the Attorney General: Analysis of Proposed Bond Initiative 15-0005. Sacramento, CA: Legislative Analyst’s Office . http://www.lao.ca.gov/ballot/2015/150023.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Leroy, F. Greene School Facilities Act of 1998, Education Code of California, Chapter 12.5 § 17070.10–17079.30.
   Google Scholar
• Lipman, P. 2011. The New Political Economy of Urban Education: Neoliberalism, Race, and the Right to the City. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Little Hoover Commission. 2010. Building California: Infrastructure Choices and Strategy. Sacramento: Little Hoover Commission . http://www.lhc.ca.gov/studies/199/report199.html.
   Google Scholar
• Lubienski, C., J. Scott, and E. DeBray. 2011. “The Rise of Intermediary Organizations in Knowledge Production, Advocacy, and Educational Policy.” Teachers College Record 22: 1–3.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, I. W. 2008. The Permanent Tax Revolt: How the Property Tax Transformed American Politics. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, I. W., A. K. Mehrotra, and M. Prasad. 2009. The New Fiscal Sociology: Taxation in Comparative and Historical Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511627071
   Google Scholar
• McDonnell, L. M. 2005. “No Child Left behind and the Federal Role in Education: Evolution or Revolution?” Peabody Journal of Education 80 (2): 19–38.10.1207/S15327930pje8002_2
   Google Scholar
• Miles, M. B., A. M. Huberman, and J. Saldaña. 2014. Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, J. 2015. ‘$9 Billion School Bond Clears Signature Threshold for November 2016 Ballot.’ Sacramento Bee, September 18. http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article35761368.html.
   Google Scholar
• Milward ,H. B.1994. “ Implications of Contracting out: New Roles for the Hollow State.” In New Paradigms for Government: Issues for the Changing Public Service, edited by P. W.Ingraham and B. S. Romzek, 41–62.San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Minow ,M.2002. Partners, Not Rivals: Privatization and the Public Good. Boston: Beacon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mintrop, H., and T. Trujillo. 2005. “Corrective Action in Low Performing Schools: Lessons for NCLB Implementation from First-Generation Accountability Systems.” Education Policy Analysis Archives 13 (48): 1–30.
   Google Scholar
• Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board. 2013. Costs Associated with Issuing Municipal Securities. Washington, DC: Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board. http://msrb.org/msrb1/pdfs/Understanding-Gross-Spread.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board. 2017. Rule G-17. Washington, DC: Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board. http://www.msrb.org/Rules-and-Interpretations/MSRB-Rules/General/Rule-G-17.aspx?tab=2.
   Google Scholar
• Naqvi, J. 2015. The 2015–16 Budget: Rethinking How the State Funds School Facilities. Sacramento: Legislative Analyst’s Office. http://www.lao.ca.gov/reports/2015/budget/school-facilities/school-facilities-021715.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Newman, M., and M. O’Malley. 1996. Property Taxes: Why Some Local Governments Get More than Others. Sacramento: Legislative Analyst’s Office. http://www.lao.ca.gov/1996/082196_prop_taxes/property_tax_differences_pb82196.html.
   Google Scholar
• O’Malley, M., C. Guyer, and E. Skinner. 2001. A New Blueprint for California School Facility Finance. Sacramento: Legislative Analyst’s Office. http://www.lao.ca.gov/2001/school_facilities/050101_school_facilities.html.
   Google Scholar
• Oakes, J. 2004. “Investigating the Claims in Williams V. State of California: An Unconstitutional Denial of Education’s Basic Tools?” Teachers College Record 106 (10): 1889–1906.10.1111/tcre.2004.106.issue-10
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orr, M. 1999. Black Social Capital: The Politics of School Reform in Baltimore, 1986–1998. Studies in Government and Public Policy. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
   Google Scholar
• Proposition 13: People’s Initiative to Limit Property Taxation 1978. Sacramento, CA: Secretary of State.
   Google Scholar
• Proposition 1D: Kindergarten-University Public Education Facilities Bond Act of 2006. Sacramento, CA: Secretary of State.
   Google Scholar
• Proposition 39: Smaller Classes, Safer Schools and Financial Accountability Act 2000. Sacramento, CA: Secretary of State. http://vigarchive.sos.ca.gov/2000/general/text/text-proposed-law-39.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Proposition 46: Local tax increases allowed for bond repayment 1986. Sacramento, CA: Secretary of State.
   Google Scholar
• Proposition 51: School bonds: Funding for K-12 school and community college facilities 2016. Sacramento, CA: Secretary of State. https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/initiatives/pdfs/15-0005%20(Education%20Bond%20Act).pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Raineri, L. 2008. Fiscal Crisis Assistance and Management Team Training Presentation. PowerPoint Document. Sacramento, CA: Government Financial Strategies.
   Google Scholar
• Raineri, L., and K. Weaver. 2013. Understanding Debt: Chief Business Officer Training Presentation. PowerPoint Document. Sacramento, CA: Government Financial Strategies.
   Google Scholar
• Rothstein, R. 2014. The Making of Ferguson: Public Policies at the Root of Its Troubles. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute. http://norwalkbranchnaacp.org/files/The_Making_of_Ferguson.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Savidge, W. 2015. Envisioning a New School Facilities Program: Presentation at the Coalition for Adequate School Housing Annual Conference Workshop. PowerPoint Document. Sacramento, CA: State Allocation Board.
   Google Scholar
• School Facilities, California Government Code, Chapter 4.7 § 65970–65981.
   Google Scholar
• School Facilities Construction, California Code of Regulations, Title 5, Articles 1–4.
   Google Scholar
• School Facilities: Nonstructural Earthquake Hazards: Inspection, Assembly Bill 1783 (2015–2016), Chapter 8 (Cal. Stat. 2016).
   Google Scholar
• Sciarra, D. G., K. L. Bell, and S. Kenyon. 2006. Safe and Adequate: Using Litigation to Address Inadequate K-12 School Facilities. Newark, DE: Education Law Center.
   Google Scholar
• Sclar, E. 2000. You Don’t Always Get What You Pay for: The Economics of Privatization. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, J. 2011. “Market-Driven Education Reform and the Racial Politics of Advocacy.” Peabody Journal of Education 86 (5): 580–599.10.1080/0161956X.2011.616445
   Google Scholar
• Sielke, C. 2001. “Funding School Infrastructure Needs across the States.” Journal of Education Finance 27 (2): 653–662.
   Google Scholar
• Tax Limitation, California Constitution, Article XIII a § 1.
   Google Scholar
• Timar, T. 2006. How California Funds K-12 Education: Report of the Governor’s Committee on Education Excellence. Palo Alto: Stanford University, Institute for Research on Education Policy and Practice . https://cepa.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/2-Timar(3-07).pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Tolofari, S. 2005. “New Public Management and Education.” Policy Futures in Education 3 (1): 75–89.10.2304/pfie.2005.3.1.11
   Google Scholar
• Trujillo, T. 2014. “The Modern Cult of Efficiency: Intermediary Organizations and the New Scientific Management.” Educational Policy 28 (2): 207–232.10.1177/0895904813513148
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Urban School Construction Aid Law of 1968, Education Code of California, Chapter 7 § 16700–16734.
   Google Scholar
• Vincent, J. M. 2012. California’s K-12 Educational Infrastructure Investments: Leveraging the State’s Role for Quality School Facilities in Sustainable Communities. Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley, Center for Cities + Schools . http://citiesandschools.berkeley.edu/reports/CCS2012CAK12facilities.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Vincent, J. M., and L. S. Gross. 2015. Guided by Principles: Shaping the State of California’s Role in K-12 Public School Facility Funding. Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley, Center for Cities + Schools . http://citiesandschools.berkeley.edu/uploads/2015_Guided_by_Princples.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Vincent, J. M., and L. Jain. 2015. Going It Alone: Can California’s K-12 School Districts Adequately and Equitably Fund School Facilities?. Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley, Center for Cities + Schools . http://citiesandschools.berkeley.edu/uploads/Vincent__Jain_2015_Going_it_Alone_final.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Vincent, J., D. McKoy, and L. Baker. 2008. Re-Visioning School Facility Planning and Design for the 21st Century: Creating Optimal Learning Environments. Sacramento: California Department of Education. http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/fa/sf/documents/roundtablereport.pdf.
   Google Scholar