The newly approved state budget stripped authority from the elected county superintendent of public instruction, transferred power in January to a governor’s appointee, and dramatically changed the oversight and management of the public school system that serves more than 6 million students from kindergarten through 12th grade.
This change was driven by Gov. Gavin Newsom at the urging of academics and education reformers who have long criticized how the state’s $149 billion public education program is managed.
In fact, this change includes increased power within the governor’s office – simplifying and primarily replacing a decentralized system where the state superintendent has significant influence, but no direct control over budget and policy.
Supporters hail the move as bringing accountability and consistency – through the governor – to all departments and agencies involved in education.
“The passage of education reform, one hundred years in the making, is a historic victory for California’s students to finally establish a meaningful plan to better support them,” said Ted Lempert, president of Children Now, an Oakland-based research and advocacy organization. “We commend Governor Newsom for his leadership in making this much-needed change a reality.”
Critics called the change an unfair, undemocratic step on the state’s constitution and the will of the voters.
“California’s constitutional structure deliberately set up a private school superintendent to ensure that public education is directly accountable to voters,” wrote a labor coalition that included the nation’s two largest teacher unions. “Replacing an elected constitutional officer with a federal executive acting at the whim of the executive branch breaks that model, permanently silencing the voice of the public when the expression of democracy is so important.”
Critics have noted that voters have defeated all attempts to eliminate an elected state superintendent.
The latest effort bypasses the ballot box by retaining elected office, but robs it of much of its power. The bill did not go through the lengthy legislative process; instead it was folded as a trailer bill into the state budget.
School district management groups, such as one representing district superintendents, were strongly supportive of the changes.
Distribute authority and accountability
Authority over education has long been shared between different officials.
The Legislature enacts laws relating to education. The governor chooses which one to sign. The governor also proposes what should be paid for education in his budget plan. The Legislature can amend the plan and is responsible for approving it.
An elected state superintendent runs the state Department of Education and serves as the executive leader of the state Board of Education, whose members are appointed by the governor to serve four-year terms. The superintendent does not have a vote on the board and must follow the board’s authority in some areas but not in others.
The board approves the educational policy and curriculum.
“The country’s current system of support and accountability to local districts is unbalanced,” resulting in “high-income islands surrounded by deserts where there isn’t much development,” said former State Board of Education President Michael Kirst, an emeritus professor of education at Stanford. Teaching in every state was “impossible” under the current situation, he said.
How the office will change
All powers of the state superintendent will be transferred to the commissioner of education, who will be appointed by the governor and approved by the state Senate.
That means the next governor will gain direct control or control over using appointees to develop and implement the education budget — including federal and state grants — and develop education policies.
Under the old system, a state superintendent oversaw grants while interpreting state education law and making sure schools complied.
The new law places the superintendent’s role instead as “an independent voice that is not a public interest group in the governance of public education systems.” This role includes reporting to the Legislature on “the state of education based on a statewide consultation and journey to identify key trends, challenges, and emerging issues.”
Critics worry that that doesn’t mean anything.
That may be the case at first, as the new law gives the new education commissioner until Oct. 1, 2027 to propose additional changes including the “future role and personnel” of the superintendent-elect.
Until then, the new law provides for the superintendent to have several deputies and a core clerical staff.
The superintendent is also one of the 11 members of the state Board of Education and the 19 members of the Board of Governors of California Community Colleges.
The change was opposed by candidates for office
The reshuffle comes as two candidates are slated to run for superintendent in November. Both are strongly opposed to change.
The race pits Republican Sonja Shaw, who came out first in the primary, against Democrat Richard Barrera.
Shaw, who slammed the move as a “blatant power grab” that “silences voters,” said he has a game plan for how he intends to use the former’s powers in office if elected.
Sonja Shaw’s candidacy for county superintendent
(Photo courtesy of Sonja Shaw)
“An outsider serving as state superintendent who refuses to simply defer to Sacramento can use the office’s authority over grants, contracts, government programs, accountability programs, financial standards, parent services, and administrative functions to prioritize results over ideas,” Shaw said.
“In practice, that would mean focusing resources on proven reading and math instruction, increasing transparency, encouraging increased parental involvement, protecting fairness and safety for girls in sports,” he said.
If elected, Barrera said he hopes to work quickly to fill vacancies with a meaningful role for the superintendent and to bring in important academic voices he said have been left out until now.
Richard Barrera, public schools candidate
(Sam Hodgson/San Diego Union-Tribune)
“The whole purpose of this reorganization is to bring people together, to focus on the learning goals of the students, and I can say that we still have a long way to go,” said Barrera.
Both candidates said there are potential grounds for legal challenges to the rewritten jobs.
California Teachers Assn. President David Goldberg was also among the dissenting voices.
“There are always many problems for the manager, and education issues may be placed at the top.” State voters, he added, “really wanted an independent voice on public education,” someone willing to sometimes stand up to the governor.
Supporters of the reform argue that the governor – who must answer to broader interests – will not be easily accessible to special interest groups in education, including teachers’ unions.
The central principles of the new framework are based on a December 2025 report from Policy Analysis for California Education, a non-participating institute that includes researchers from Stanford, UC Berkeley, UCLA, UC Davis and USC.
