SACRAMENTO, Calif., Aug. 16 (Our California Times) — California schools are beginning to return unused money from a voter-approved arts education program, even as districts work to hire teachers and determine which expenses the funds can legally cover.
Proposition 28, approved by voters in 2022, sets aside about $1 billion each year for arts instruction in public kindergarten-through-12th-grade schools. But the law requires schools to spend the money within three years or return what remains to the state.
The California Department of Education has not announced how much money was returned after the first three-year spending period. State officials plan to redistribute unused funds to schools that are spending their allocations in line with the law, based on annual spending reports.
For students and families, the issue is whether the money will result in new or expanded classes in subjects such as music, dance, theater and visual arts — or remain unspent because schools cannot find staff or are unsure about the rules.
What does Proposition 28 require?
The funding is distributed mainly according to student enrollment. Schools serving larger populations of low-income students receive additional funding through the state formula.
At least 80% of each school’s allocation must be used for additional arts staff or educators. The remaining money may be used for supplies and other arts-related expenses.
The law also says the funding must supplement existing arts programs, rather than replace money schools were already spending. That provision is known as the “supplement, not supplant” rule.
In practice, that means a district generally cannot use Proposition 28 money simply to pay for an existing arts position or program. Arts organizations and labor leaders have raised concerns that some districts may have done so or may be considering it.
Why are schools having trouble spending the money?
School officials have cited two main obstacles: finding qualified arts teachers and understanding what the law permits.
Arts instruction requires specialized staff, and some districts have struggled to fill those jobs. Schools also have faced questions about whether they can share teachers among campuses, pool money across schools or use funds for particular programs and supplies.
El Dorado County Superintendent of Schools Ed Manansala said the county has a long history of supporting arts education but wants clearer guidance before moving ahead. “We need clarity and confidence that we’re doing this the right way,” Manansala said.
The supplied reporting does not identify a statewide count of vacant arts-teacher positions. It also does not identify every school or district that returned money, or the amount returned by each one.
Data compiled by Create CA, a nonprofit that supported Proposition 28, indicated that dozens — and possibly hundreds — of schools spent none of their allocations. That estimate has not been matched in the available information by a statewide total from the Department of Education.
What happens to unspent funds?
After three years, unspent funds must be returned to the state. The Department of Education is expected to use annual spending reports to determine which schools are following the law and to redistribute money to eligible schools that can spend it properly.
That process may benefit schools that already have arts teachers and programs ready to expand. But it also means that a school that received money for a particular grade level or campus may not keep the full allocation if it cannot meet the spending requirements on time.
The available information does not establish whether every returned dollar resulted from a school’s voluntary decision or from the three-year legal deadline.
Could the rules change?
Assembly Bill 2440, authored by Assemblymember Al Muratsuchi, was reported as having passed the Assembly unanimously in May 2026. The proposal would allow districts to pool money assigned to 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 supplied records do not establish whether the bill became law, its final language or an effective date.
Supporters of more flexible rules say districts need practical options when individual schools cannot hire arts teachers or spend their allocations. Critics, including former Los Angeles Unified School District Superintendent Austin Beutner, have argued that loosening the rules could weaken the requirement that Proposition 28 money expand arts education rather than replace existing funding.
For California schools, the central question remains operational: how to turn a voter-approved funding promise into actual instruction for students while meeting the law’s staffing, spending and reporting requirements.
