Post Type
DECLARATION OF BRUCE D. BAKER in support of plaintiffs’ motion for Preliminary injunction in Miliani Rodriguez v. state
This is the expert declaration from economist Bruce D. Baker (University of Miami), submitted in support of the preliminary injunction motion. Drawing on decades of research and California-specific data, Baker makes three core findings:
Facilities investment matters — A substantial body of research shows that capital spending improves student achievement, health, and teacher retention, with the greatest benefits accruing to low-income students.
California’s system is structurally inequitable — Because SFP aid is contingent on passing local bonds, and wealthier districts are 61% more likely to pass bonds than the poorest, state modernization dollars flow disproportionately to affluent communities. From 1998-2022, the wealthiest quintile of districts received $7,116 per pupil in modernization aid compared to just $3,371 for the poorest — more than double. The financial hardship program has been largely ineffective, accounting for less than 3% of modernization funds distributed.
Proposition 2 and AB 247 don’t fix it — The new sliding scale only moves the state match from 60% to a maximum of 65%, which UC Berkeley’s Center for Cities and Schools projects would reduce the wealth-based funding gap only marginally (from 90% to 87%). Baker points to Kansas, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and New York as models for a genuinely wealth-equalized state aid formula California should adopt instead.