Obviously an ideologically driven article. Not saying that there aren't any issues with California's education system, but this article distorts things and relies on biased sources. And we'll just set aside the fact that California already agreed to implement Common Core, so of course there will be up front costs to implement the change. But back to the article, for example;

form the article:

A California commission has just decided the technology costs for Common Core tests are an unfunded mandate, which will require state taxpayers to cough up approximately $4 billion more to local school districts,

From the source source linked in that very paragraph:

This new mandate, with an estimated annual statewide cost of $600 million, would require the state to reimburse school districts and county offices of education for these costs.

So which is it? $4.3 billion or $600 million? those are vastly different numbers.

I also take issue with their assessment of the new standard as lower quality. They mostly rely on a report from an organization called The Pioneer Institute, but this group an admitted ideological goal. From their Mission statement:

Pioneer Institute is an independent, non-partisan, privately funded research organization that seeks to improve the quality of life in Massachusetts through civic discourse and intellectually rigorous, data-driven public policy solutions based on free market principles, individual liberty and responsibility, and the ideal of effective, limited and accountable government

This is not an impartial group, they have a stated agenda.

Overall, this is a good conversation to have but the article is of low quality. Are California's interests being met in regards to education? Is the spending being used appropriately? But lets keep the conversation based on objective analysis and empirical observation, not the writings of ideological advocacy groups like the Federalist.