Apodaca: Big school news: vaccination law and debate over caps on reserves

As the grills cool and fireworks detritus is swept away from our holiday celebrations, the fifth of July is as good a time as any to take stock of some important developments involving our schools.

Warranting particularly close attention is the under-the-radar battle being waged in California over — of all things — school district reserves.

These are the extra monies districts squirrel away, the rough equivalent of the savings that you and I try to set aside after paying bills. The reserves are used to manage cash flow, help districts through periods of funding volatility, cover one-time expenditures and secure higher credit ratings.

Reserves vary from one district to the next. Small districts tend to have larger reserves as a percentage of their budgets, even though the actual amounts can be relatively small. Reserves also fluctuate based on the state of the overall economy and other factors such as federal stimulus spending and state-mandated cuts.

Generally, reserves that are stable or growing are viewed as a measure of financial health. Indeed, Newport-Mesa Unified’s reserves were credited in large part for helping it survive during the last recession without resorting to the more brutal cuts suffered by many other districts, and it has dipped into those funds to help pay for the implementation of the new Common Core educational standards.

But in a measure that slipped by largely unnoticed by the public, the state now caps the amount of reserves that school districts may hold. Even though removing those caps might seem to be a fiscally responsible no-brainer, attempts to repeal them have met with stiff opposition.

The caps grew out of Gov. Jerry Brown’s initiative to create a state rainy-day fund under Proposition 2, which voters approved last November. During budget negotiations, the reserve restrictions were folded into a trailer bill that required the caps to go into effect when deposits are made into a statewide school reserve. At the time, the vast majority of school districts exceeded their designated caps, some by considerable margins, according to a report by the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

It was widely assumed that Brown acceded to the caps in order to get the powerful California Teachers Assn. to not oppose his rainy-day fund. The teachers union has complained that large reserves keep money off the table during salary negotiations.

The LAO report in January recommended repeal of the caps, noting that they create budgeting confusion, add to risk and borrowing costs, and make it difficult for districts to manage through financial downturns and unexpected expenditures. A wide coalition of groups including those that represent school administrators also support a repeal.

But a recent Assembly bill that would have repealed the caps never even made it out of the education committee. A new measure has been submitted that would not remove the restrictions outright but would make them more flexible. Let’s hope that a prudent solution can be quickly achieved.

The other big story in education has been impossible to miss: A bill that undoes the personal- and religious-belief exemption for vaccinating school children was signed into law by Brown on Tuesday.

This is good news.

The measure was prompted by the outbreak of measles at Disneyland last December that led to the infection of about 150 people. Sensing growing public support, legislators seized the moment to promote a measure that would require nearly all children enrolled in school or day care in California to be immunized against diseases such as the measles and whooping cough.

The personal-belief exemption has long been a huge loophole that has allowed parents to enroll their unvaccinated children in schools, threatening the health of students who can’t be immunized because of diseases such as cancer or auto-immune disorders, as well as kids who haven’t yet received the full suite of recommended vaccinations and aren’t completely covered.

Those opposed to vaccines have been swayed by thoroughly discredited assertions that they cause autism and other ailments. Despite a slight risk of adverse reactions to some vaccines, the overwhelming historical and scientific evidence shows that immunizations have contributed greatly to public health. Yet denial still runs high in some communities, threatening the high rate of coverage needed to achieve the so-called herd effect that protects against outbreaks.

Indeed, immunization rates have been dropping in California. In the past school year, for instance, 92.6% of kindergarten students statewide had received the required measles, mumps and rubella vaccine, down from 95.5% in 2004. In some areas, including parts of Orange County, the rates are significantly lower.

Newport-Mesa’s Harbor View and Eastbluff elementary schools were designated by the California Department of Public Health as being among the most vulnerable, with less than 70% of kindergarten students in the past school year having received all required vaccination doses. Some local private schools have much lower rates, sometimes well below 50%.

The bill faced fierce opposition by some legislators and protests by anti-vaccine parents who argue that immunizations should remain a choice. Those parents who chose to withhold the required immunizations will now have to enroll their children in home-based or independent study programs. Children with legitimate medical reasons for forgoing vaccinations would still be exempt.

Court challenges to the new law are expected, and enforcement could prove difficult. Nonetheless, it’s a significant step toward protecting the health of our children.

PATRICE APODACA is a former Newport-Mesa public school parent and former Los Angeles Times staff writer. She lives in Newport Beach.