In summary
The proposed changes aim to allay schools’ apprehension about spending their arts money granted through an initiative voters passed in 2022.
A bill to clarify how schools should spend California’s $1 billion annual investment in arts education is headed for Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk after legislators reached a compromise with a champion of the original initiative.
“I’m delighted to come to an agreement that will further arts education for kids in California,” said Austin Beutner, former superintendent of Los Angeles Unified and chief architect behind Proposition 28, California’s ambitious vision for music, theater, drama and fine art in K-12 schools.
The bill, AB 2440, seeks to streamline and clarify some of the finer points of Prop. 28, which voters overwhelmingly passed in 2022. Prop. 28 requires schools to use their new arts funding to supplement – not replace – existing programs. But schools’ confusion over Prop. 28 rules had led dozens of districts to return their arts money to the state, for fear of spending it incorrectly and getting sued.
That was the case with Los Angeles Unified, which Beutner sued in 2025, claiming the district cut existing arts programs and replaced them using Prop. 28 money – an allegation the district denies. That case is pending in Los Angeles Superior Court.
Clarifying Prop. 28
AB 2440, by Assemblymember Al Muratsuchi, a Democrat from Torrance, aims to allay schools’ apprehension about spending their arts money. Among other things, the bill more closely aligns Prop. 28 with the state’s existing arts framework, so schools would have an exact definition of what constitutes an arts class.
The bill also makes clear that schools can pool their Prop. 28 money and share arts teachers and other resources. And it addresses murky issues such as whether arts funding from outside groups, such as band boosters or nonprofits, counts as part of schools’ existing arts budgets.
Beutner originally balked at the bill when he learned of it, saying it “gutted” the intent of Prop. 28 by giving schools too much leeway in how they spent their money. He feared that more districts would use Prop. 28 money to backfill cuts to existing programs, rather than add to the overall arts offerings.
His opposition threatened to derail the bill, but he and the bill’s supporters reached a compromise after news coverage in CalMatters and other outlets. The new version of the bill contains the line: “The local education agency shall certify that all provisions of (Proposition 28) have been implemented at each of its school sites.”
‘This will mean more art’
That amended language was enough to satisfy Beutner, who withdrew his opposition in mid-August.
“My hope is that this causes districts to further reflect on whether they’re in compliance with Prop. 28,” Beutner said. “I’m delighted we were able to collaborate on this.”
The bill passed unanimously.
Kyle Holmes, director of statewide arts initiatives for California County Superintendents, a prominent supporter of Muratsuchi’s bill, said he’s thrilled it appears headed for passage.
“For kids, this will mean more art,” Holmes said. “That’s the heart of this bill, making sure schools have better access to Prop. 28 funds, giving schools the clarity they need to get funding to students.”
Prop. 28 still has a few obstacles, though. A big one is finding arts teachers. Some districts have had arts teacher vacancies for six months or more, as the existing supply hasn’t met the demand. A recent Stanford Research Institute study found a shortfall of 5,000 arts teachers in California.
“We’re seeing more and more colleges offering credential programs for the arts,” Holmes said. “But more young people need to know that if you’re interested in teaching the arts there’s a clear pathway to a high-paying career.”
