California: School officials counting on Prop. 55 passage

About 100 statewide organizations have endorsed Proposition 55, including the Gray Panthers as well as the Painting and Decorating Contractors of California.

Nearly 300 local groups - from the Chinese Chamber of Commerce of Los Angeles to the Woodside School District - have signed on to support the $12.3 billion school facilities bond on the March ballot.

In addition, there are 53 state legislators on the thumbs-up list so far, along with 26 individuals, including former California Community Colleges Chancellor Thomas Nussbaum. One is really hard-pressed to find much formal opposition to Prop. 55.

Instead, the bond's most daunting challenge likely will come at the ballot box. There, debt-fearing voters - facing the $27.3 billion bond combination of Prop. 55 and the governor's debt-reduction request for $15 billion - could be struck by an overwhelming case of sticker shock.

``In a perfect world, we wouldn't want to make those decisions,'' said Mike Bowman, spokesman for the California Business for Educational Excellence, a coalition of major business and business organizations that has endorsed the initiative. ``In a perfect world, we wouldn't want to be in this situation.''

Economically speaking, California is about as far from a perfect world as it can get.

Even if Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's $15 billion bond passes, the state would still have a huge budget hole - which the governor wants to plug with cuts to social services and health care as well as a $2 billion squeeze on schools that would require a suspension of Proposition 98.

If both bonds pass, the state would add $1.2 billion to the state's annual debt payment in 2004-2005 and increase ``moderately in subsequent years,'' according to the Legislative Analyst's Office. If both measures pass, the total debt payment next year would be about $4.7 billion - a so-called debt ratio of about 6.5 percent.

And that's too much, according to the California Republican Assembly, a conservative grassroots political organization, which is sponsoring the Web site ProtectTaxpayers.com, to oppose Prop. 55.

``California is in the midst of the worst financial crisis in its history,'' the site says. ``We need more schools, not more debt for taxpayers.''

But supporters of the school bond say the state can't afford not to pass Prop. 55. ``This is critical,'' said state Superintendent Jack O'Connell. ``We cannot ignore a generation of kids.'' The state will need 22,000 more classrooms in the next five years to meet enrollment increases, he said.

Add maintenance and modernization needs - including seismic upgrades - and the total five-year demand reaches $17 billion.

Prop. 55 would split the $12.3 billion, with K-12 getting the lion's share of $10 billion and the state's university and college systems getting $2.3 billion.

To qualify for the money, locals must raise matching funds, typically through local bonds or, in some cases, developer fees.

``The day (Prop. 55) passes, we will still see a shortfall,'' added O'Connell, who also supports Prop. 57.

Gov. Schwarzenegger supports Prop. 55, too, although he has never formally announced his position and has so far generally avoided the topic as he travels the state to promote Prop. 57.

``Both measures are important for different reasons,'' O'Connell said. ``It's not an either/or.''

In fact, when it comes to the school bond, it's not really if we take on the debt, but when.

There is no regular funding mechanism to build or repair the state's 8,000 public schools. Local and state bonds pay for the vast majority of school facility projects.

Prop. 55 supporters point to the dry period of the 1990s, when the state simply didn't fund school or college facilities from either bonds or the budget.

And then the roofs started leaking. Old boilers went bad and classrooms got cold. Or they got too hot when the air conditioning crashed.

Old wiring wouldn't work with the Internet. Auditoriums, teacher lounges and sometimes even closets became classrooms.

Voters first approved Proposition 1A in November 1998, for $9.2 billion. Then, in 2002, Proposition 47's $13 billion bond passed with 59 percent voter support. Prop. 47 was the first half of a two-part bond the state Legislature voted to put on the ballot.

Prop. 55 is the second half. If Prop. 55 doesn't pass in March, voters will have another go at it in November, a caveat legislators included when they approved the two-bond school facilities package in 2002.

But after Prop. 47 easily passed in 2002, supporters were generally optimistic its 2004 sibling would as well.

Then hard times hit harder and the state deficit soared, followed by the recall of Gov. Gray Davis, the election of Schwarzenegger and ultimately the fashioning of Prop. 57. Passage of Prop. 55 is no longer a sure thing.

On the California State University, Hayward campus, Warren Hall sticks up from among the lower-lying buildings around it. The administration offices are housed inside - as are a number of classrooms.

The building, with 13 stories, is seismically vulnerable as it sits practically on top of the Hayward fault.

Prop. 55 would help pay for the required $28 million seismic upgrade, said CSU Hayward President Rees, whose office is on the top floor of Warren Hall, which she calls seismically unsafe.

Rees drily calls herself ``queen of de-nial,'' a label that allows her to fearlessly sit in her office everyday.

Down south a ways, the Fremont Unified School District is also hoping the bond will pass.

The district already has five projects completely approved for state funding. There just isn't any state modernization money left from Prop. 47.

``We're just waiting for the money,'' said Therese Gain, Fremont's director of facilities management. ``Everybody's been waiting, waiting, waiting.''

Kennedy High School stands to get about $5 million of about $11 million allocated to the district.

The 1,200-student high school needs a new roof. The current one leaks. The stage requires handicap access. They need to upgrade the water, lighting and heating systems. And repair dry rot.

``We're not talking luxuries,'' Gain said. ``We're talking about making the building last another decade or so.''

But Kennedy High School's needs are just the tip of the iceberg, Gain said. All told, the district needs about $220 million for facility maintenance and modernization.

One survey, for example, showed that 1 million students are in schools with bathrooms that don't work.

Across Alameda County, 13 of the 18 districts are already in line to get state matching funds to help pay for $410 million worth of new construction and repairs. District officials say that's only the projects that have made it through the long state approval process.

But wait - that's not all, say the bond's supporters, who almost seem ready to throw in a free set of Ginsu knives if voters pass the measure.

Not only is the need at a critical level, they say, but the bond is good for business.

Prop. 55 is ``a sound, prudent investment that will contribute to our future and economic prosperity,'' said state Treasurer Phil Angelides.

The California Chamber of Commerce, the California Business Roundtable, California Taxpayers' Association and the American Planning Association - California Chapter are among the 100 statewide groups on the endorsement list.

So is the American Fence Contractors' Association, California Chapter, in case anyone was wondering if the fence folks were on the fence.

According to the Yes on 55 campaign literature, ``school construction is a direct investment in the local economy.''

The measure would create ``hundreds of thousands of new jobs and add billions in local economic activities throughout California.''

Prop. 55 is ``a sound, prudent investment that will contribute to our future and economic prosperity,'' said state Treasurer Phil Angelides.
The California Chamber of Commerce, the California Business Roundtable, California Taxpayers' Association and the American Planning Association - California Chapter are among the 100 statewide groups on the endorsement list.
So is the American Fence Contractors' Association, California Chapter, in case anyone was wondering if the fence folks were on the fence.
According to the Yes on 55 campaign literature, ``school construction is a direct investment in the local economy.''
The measure would create ``hundreds of thousands of new jobs and add billions in local economic activities throughout California.''
________________________________________________________________________________

I thought Phil said borrowing money is bad!

Class size reduction as mandated in Rob Reiner's ballot Proposition 8, which created a need for more classrooms. Class size reduction didn't work, increasing test scores by only 4% with a 35% increase in labor cost (as compared to Prop 227 (ending bilingual ed) which actually produced a HIGHER increase in test scores while costing LESS).

Class size reduction screwed kids in inner city schools. Here's how: When Mr. Reiner's initiative passed, there were massive new openings for teachers in upper crust schools. The best teachers in inner city schools left for the opportunity to teach better kids in a safer place. The inner city schools were left to hire the dregs of the teaching profession to meet the mandate.

Another liberal mandate that hurts the same people it purports to help. Instead of building more buildings that last thirty to fifty years we should be repudiating a failed act of union featherbedding. It would be the largest single budget cut we could reasonably make.

Instead of building new facilities, we should be decentralizing schools so that kids can be closer to parents during the day. Besides, they're losing students to competition. Home education is growing by 10-15% per year.

Excellent answer, thanks. I knew I could count on you.

How can we reverse this? It seems like there's a yawning chasm between public perception ("shrinking class size is good") and reality (it doesn't make much difference). That seems to be a problem with school funding in general; it's automatically assumed more money is better even if a sizable percentage of it is wasted.

Could schools be made less authoritarian? The visit I made to a school some months ago really shook me. (You may remember my more detailed account since I think I pinged you to it). My $5,000-odd yearly property tax is paying for schools that, in my brief look, seemed like nightmare places.

It's no wonder homeschooling is becoming popular. I don't think I'd have any choice but homeschooling if I stayed where I am today.

D

How can we reverse this? It seems like there's a yawning chasm between public perception ("shrinking class size is good") and reality (it doesn't make much difference). That seems to be a problem with school funding in general; it's automatically assumed more money is better even if a sizable percentage of it is wasted.

I think the best political tool is to use class warfare against the liberal/union position. That's why I make the point about how class-size-reduction screwed inner city kids. We need to demonize the union without demonizing the teaching profession. That justifies the effort to crush the union financially and lumping them with prison guards might help there (I KNOW you can imagine the imagery comparing jails with public schools in a TV ad... boy would I love to write that script :-).

The key financial tools are enforcing Communicatios Workers v. Beck and going after back taxes for political influence buying.

Only after those steps can we go after a then politically and financially weakened monopoly: privatizing the schools from within.

All of what I just wrote and in the post above was in that one little article on education I sent you. In fact, the same method can be applied to any unionized bureaucracy.

I'm ready to get out of California. Did you hear about the city of San Diego? They're being investigated by the Feds for falsifying the solvency of the City in order to sell bonds. THEY HAVEN'T FUNDED THE CITY PENSION PROGRAM. Can you believe it? It's all going to spiral and I truly think housing prices are at their highest. Something's gotta give...I want to take my money and run. Maybe in a 15-20 years things will have worked themselves out, but for the near future I see nothing but trouble.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.