More than 5,000 students in the San Gabriel Valley area could be forced to change school districts in the coming years if District of Choice sunsets — a change that would cause millions of dollars in budget cuts and hundreds of layoffs in affected school districts.

The possible upheaval comes as a result of the death of Senate Bill 1432, which would have extended California’s District of Choice program through the 2021-22 school year. As it stands, this school year will be the last for the program. District of Choice, where a school district can opt to allow any child to attend its schools regardless of the student’s home address, was originally passed in 1993 as a way to foster competition between districts. Under the program, state funding follows students who choose to attend school in a different district.

How bill stalled

SB 1432 was widely supported and sailed unanimously through three Senate committees and the Assembly Education Committee, and it was approved by a 38-1 vote on the Senate floor until two weeks ago when it was held by Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, D-San Diego, chair of the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

“It is in the Assembly Appropriations Committee’s judgement that the Districts of Choice program exacerbates the unequal system of haves-and-have-nots in our public schools and that the most disadvantaged schools and the students they serve get left behind,” Gonzalez said in a statement. “In fact, the whole program appears to run contrary to the policy led by Gov. Brown to focus more resources on the schools that need it the most.”

Area schools rely on program

Locally, Walnut Valley Unified School District benefits more from District of Choice than any other district in the state, bringing in 3,415 students from other districts in the 2014-15 school year. Glendora USD and West Covina USD are also among the state’s biggest Districts of Choice, bringing in 1,392 and 633 additional students, respectively.

The bill that was proposed as an alternative to SB 1432, Assembly Bill 1771, would have allowed the program to expire, while students currently attending a District of Choice could finish their time at their school before transferring back to their home district. This would mean students like sixth-grader Alyna Evans could stay at her current school, Walnut Valley’s Chaparral Middle School, through the end of eighth grade, but she would have to transfer to Pomona USD, where her home is districted, for high school.

Will there be new plan?

Supporters of the program are relieved that AB 1771 failed to pass because it would guarantee that program’s demise, but it still leaves the future uncertain. There’s time in the January session for a new bill to be written and passed, extending the life of the program. But Sen. Bob Huff, R-San Dimas, the author of SB 1432, is set to retire in November, and it’s unclear who, if anyone, will take up the mantle.

“We’re trying to find a new author for a bill in January,” Teruni Evans, Alyna’s mother, said. “We’re not giving up because it’s a matter of choice. It’s a parent’s choice to decide. If I had to drive two hours away to take my kids to school, I would do it, because I want them to be able to have what I think is the best education for them.”

Evans chose to send her kids to Walnut Valley because of the Design-Based Learning program, which emphasizes learning through projects and presentations, a method that Evans thought would be beneficial for her shy daughter to gain confidence.

“[My daughters] have been out of the Pomona district for five years, so having to go back would kind of be starting again from scratch in terms of making friends,” Evans said. “Middle school and high school are already really socially awkward years, so it would be so hard to throw them back into a different environment for no reason, for no justification.”

End of program could bring major cuts

The impact would go beyond the students themselves. Walnut Valley USD Superintendent Bob Taylor said that his district will lose $29 million, or a little more than a quarter of its budget, if the program is not extended. That would mean laying off more than 300 district employees, closing down at least four schools and cutting the number of programs the district offers.

“It would be devastating — not only to our District of Choice and 11,000 other students, not only to our employees, but to our community as a whole,” Taylor said.

Ahead of the decision about whether or not to reauthorize the program, the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office put together a report evaluating it and recommended extending the program for at least five more years. Among the office’s findings was the fact that test scores in both Districts of Choice and students’ home districts rose more than the statewide average, and that many home districts sought to create new educational programs that better aligned with their communities.

“We believe the benefits of the program, including additional educational options and improved outcomes for students, justify reauthorization,” the report read. “Moreover, eliminating the program would be disruptive for about 10,000 existing transfer students and deny future transfer students the educational options that have helped previous cohorts of students.”