Court says districts can't keep bilingual programs

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) – The initiative requiring California school children to be taught in English contains exemptions for parents, but not for entire school districts, says a state appeals court.

In a 3-0 ruling Monday, the 1st District Court of Appeal said Proposition 227 prohibits school districts from gaining waivers that would allow them to keep their previous bilingual programs. It is the first ruling on this issue by an appellate court in California, and unless overturned on appeal, it would a set statewide precedent.

The ruling tightens the June 1998 ballot measure, approved by 61 percent of the voters. The court overturned a judge’s decision that the state Board of Education must consider waivers sought by numerous districts where support for bilingual classes was strong.

The board, still controlled by appointees of former Gov. Pete Wilson, has not approved any district-wide waivers and argues it has no authority to do so.

Only parents, with the approval of their children’s teachers and schools, can obtain waivers allowing students to continue to learn English and other subjects in their native language, the court said. Waivers are available only if a child is over 10 or has “special needs.”

The court “recognized that Proposition 227 was meant to empower parents, not school boards and school administrators,” said attorney Eric Grant of the Pacific Legal Foundation, which represented two anti-bilingual education groups.

Laura Schulkind, a lawyer for three San Francisco Bay area districts seeking waivers, said the ruling “is not good for districts, but more important, it’s not good for kids.”

“We differ with the court on its interpretation of Proposition 227, and question the wisdom of making complex educational policy through an initiative process where the electorate can be misinformed through ballot statements,” she said.

The initiative took effect last fall after federal courts refused to block it.

The case before the court involved a longstanding state law that was designed to preserve local control of schools, and was not mentioned in Proposition 227.

The law allows the state Board of Education to waive virtually any statewide educational law at a district’s request. The board must grant a waiver under that law if the district’s programs are meeting its students’ needs.

In a suit by the Oakland, Berkeley and Hayward districts, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Henry Needham ruled in August 1998 that the state board must consider district-wide waiver requests of Proposition 227.

But the appeals court said the proposition, which condemns bilingual education and grants parents the sole power to seek waivers from English-only instruction, could not be reconciled with a waiver allowing entire districts to keep bilingual classes.

The intent of Proposition 227 was “that English instruction will be provided in all cases except those where parental waivers are made,” said the opinion by Justice Ignazio Ruvolo.

“Parents favoring English instruction for their children are assured by law that it will be provided without the need to lobby school boards or form parent groups. … It is only when a parent decides that English-only instruction is not appropriate for his or her child that an individual waiver need be sought.”



Comments are closed.