SACRAMENTO, Calif., Aug. 16 (Our California Times) — California schools are returning some unspent Proposition 28 money after the first three-year spending period ended, leaving districts with less time and fewer options to add art, music, dance and theater programs for students.
The California Department of Education has not announced how much money has been returned statewide. The agency is expected to redistribute unspent funds to schools that are meeting the law’s requirements, based on annual spending reports.
The returns are not the result of voters abandoning arts education. In 2022, California voters approved Proposition 28, which directs about $1 billion each year to arts education in public K-12 schools.
The challenge is turning that money into classes and teachers while following rules that districts say can be difficult to interpret.
What does Proposition 28 require?
Funding is distributed mainly according to student enrollment, with additional money for schools serving larger numbers of low-income students.
At least 80% of each school’s allocation must be used for additional arts staff or educators. The rest can be used for supplies, equipment and other arts-related expenses.
The law also says the funding must supplement existing arts programs, rather than replace money schools were already spending. In practice, that means districts cannot simply use Proposition 28 money to pay for an existing arts position or program and shift the old money elsewhere.
Any allocation that remains unspent after three years must be returned to the state. The first three-year period has now ended.
Why has spending been difficult?
One problem is hiring. School districts have reported difficulty finding qualified teachers in music, visual arts, dance and other subjects. A district may have money available but still lack enough educators to create new classes or expand existing ones.
The spending rules have also created uncertainty. District officials have questioned which positions, services and supplies qualify as new arts spending, as well as how money can be used when one school cannot spend its full allocation.
That concern has reached El Dorado County. Ed Manansala, the county’s superintendent of schools, said the county wants to make sure it follows the law correctly.
“We need clarity and confidence that we’re doing this the right way,” Manansala said. He also said, “We have a long history of supporting the arts and we really want to make sure we do this right.”
For schools, the question is not only whether money is available. It is whether the funds can be used in time to hire staff, schedule classes and buy materials under the state’s rules. In smaller or rural districts, officials have also considered how music teachers might be shared among schools.
Create CA, a nonprofit that supported Proposition 28, compiled data indicating that dozens, and possibly hundreds, of schools spent none of their allocations. The underlying dataset and a statewide final count were not identified in the available information.
What happens to unspent money?
The California Department of Education receives districts’ annual spending reports and oversees the return and redistribution process. The department plans to send unspent money to schools that are using their Proposition 28 funds in compliance with the law.
The available information does not identify which schools returned money, how much each school returned or how many schools were affected.
The redistribution could help schools that have already found arts teachers and programs to support. But it does not solve the basic problem for districts that have struggled to hire staff or determine what spending is allowed. Those districts may continue to face a deadline-driven process in which unused funds leave the school system instead of supporting new student opportunities.
Why are lawmakers considering changes?
Assemblymember Al Muratsuchi authored Assembly Bill 2440, which was reported as having passed the Assembly unanimously in May 2026. The proposal would allow districts to pool funds designated for individual schools and would create a process for districts that cannot meet the 80% educator-spending requirement to seek a waiver from the California Department of Education.
The final status and text of the measure were not established in the available information. Critics, including former Los Angeles Unified School District Superintendent Austin Beutner, have argued that changes could weaken Proposition 28’s requirement that the money expand arts education rather than replace existing funding.
Supporters of greater flexibility say districts need practical ways to spend the money when individual schools cannot hire enough arts teachers or use their full allocations.
The debate reflects the central tension in Proposition 28: California set aside substantial new funding for arts education, but districts must meet detailed requirements while building programs that many schools have not previously had the staff or infrastructure to provide.
