When we go to the ballot box in November, we’ll be asked to weigh in on Proposition 320, a measure which would fundamentally change how Arizona’s public school districts operate. As leaders of local nonprofit organizations that partner directly with public school districts, we know our district partners are already struggling to stretch increasingly skinny budgets each year. Prop 320 would force districts to make impossible choices to balance their budget. 

Thousands of voters will be seeing Proposition 320 for the first time when they open their ballot. On the surface, the neutrally phrased description of Prop. 320 will sound like common sense — certain public school districts are required to spend 60% of their operating budget on “direct instruction.” As educators, we would certainly love to see more resources for our students and classrooms. But Prop 320’s impact goes far beyond the classroom. 

What isn’t included in “direct instruction” are support functions like nurses, librarians, bus drivers and after-school programs that are critical to student success. Public District schools have a legal mandate to accept all students and provide an education that meets their unique needs. That means these districts must catch students who are falling behind and provide the additional, sometimes extensive, resources they need to thrive. These are the same services that this proposition would have to cut to comply. 

The loudest argument for Prop. 320 is that it will increase teacher pay. But this proposition does not deliver on its marketing promise. Arizonans must understand that there is no guarantee this money would go toward teacher pay. In reality, without an unprecedented injection of revenue, districts would be forced to meet the 60% threshold by cutting vital support services. 

Even if teacher pay increased, teachers would likely have to take on the responsibilities of counselors, coaches, and support staff on top of what we already ask of them. And the penalty for districts that do not comply with the new 60% mandate would be a reduction in public funding from the very fund that pays teachers. 

Prop. 320 would also apply unevenly. The 60% mandate covers public school districts only. Public charter schools, which enroll about one in five Arizona public school students, are not covered, and neither are private schools or the more than 100,000 students using Empowerment Scholarship Accounts, a program the state now funds at over $1 billion a year. That’s more than 300,000 students whose schools or education funding fall outside the rules Prop. 320 would impose on districts. 

If a spending standard is worth imposing, voters should ask why it applies to some publicly funded education and not others. This proposition is not good policy. Our legislature is asking voters to mandate strong-arm district schools, without giving them the desperately needed resources to do so. At best, it’s a feeble attempt to patch a broken system with a solution that will cause more harm than good. At worst, it’s an attempt to dismantle our district’s public schools, disguised as support. 

As we prepare to vote, we need to remember what matters most in education: the students themselves. Our students need expanded access to resources and support, not more confusing legislation interfering in the classroom. As voters, we expect any education proposal on the ballot to be transparent, informed by educators, and thoughtfully considered with students at the center of intended outcomes. Prop 320 is none of those things. 

Sophie Allen-Etchart is the founder and CEO of Read Better Be Better. Courtney Sullivan is the executive director of the Arizona Center for Afterschool Excellence. Karen Johnson is the president and CEO of New Pathways for Youth. Dana Bailey is the co-CEO of Homeless Youth Connection. These Arizona nonprofits promote youth development and education and partner directly with Arizona public school districts.