Posted on 10/31/2005 10:30:00 PM PST by FairOpinion
A WEEK FROM Tuesday, California voters can adopt some much-needed reforms in the way the state operates by voting for all four of the ballot measures Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has been promoting. Together they can make significant improvements in the budgeting process, a fairer election system, a higher quality of education and sensible state and congressional district boundaries.
Proposition 76
Proposition 76 seeks to prevent California from outspending its revenues and level out wild fluctuations in the budget.
The first stipulates that state spending growth be limited to the average rate of revenue growth over the past three years. If revenues exceed the spending limit, one-fourth would go to a reserve fund, one-half to repay money owed to schools under Proposition 98 and one-fourth for school and highway construction. If revenues fall short, the spending limit for the next year would be based on the reduced level of expenditures.
my experience with the CA school funding is that money that is earmarked for construction is used only for permanent construction. If a school needs funds for a new reading or math series (required every 5 years) or the workbooks that go with it, they may not use construction money. That school then gets no money and they also get no workbooks (I am using this as an example)
The school system is plagued with excess spending and they just want to throw more money at it. If the schools trimmed at the administration level, they would not need to keep screaming that they have no money. JMO
The problem is the current Prop. 98 MANDATES a certain, rather large fraction of the budget to be spent on schools. Prop. 76 basically pulls the rug out from under such ridiculous requirement.
That alone is worth passing Prop. 76 for.
Onward to victory!
I hate the "permanent construction" money because it does not benefit most schools. This prop looks to me like money is just being shifted.
It looks like we don't need to excerpt it.
DITORIAL
Voters should adopt four needed reforms
A WEEK FROM Tuesday, California voters can adopt some much-needed reforms in the way the state operates by voting for all four of the ballot measures Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has been promoting. Together they can make significant improvements in the budgeting process, a fairer election system, a higher quality of education and sensible state and congressional district boundaries.
Proposition 76
Proposition 76 seeks to prevent California from outspending its revenues and level out wild fluctuations in the budget. There are three parts to the measure.
The first stipulates that state spending growth be limited to the average rate of revenue growth over the past three years. If revenues exceed the spending limit, one-fourth would go to a reserve fund, one-half to repay money owed to schools under Proposition 98 and one-fourth for school and highway construction. If revenues fall short, the spending limit for the next year would be based on the reduced level of expenditures.
The spending limit would level out the rate of increase in state spending over time. Budgets would be more predictable and thus more manageable.
The second part of Prop. 76 provides for a mid-year correction. If spending exceeds revenues by more than 1.5 percent, the governor could declare a fiscal emergency. The Legislature would hold a special session in which it would have 45 days to eliminate the shortfall. Lawmakers could raise revenues, cut spending or even raise spending in some areas and cut in others. If the Legislature fails to agree, the governor would be able to reduce state spending to close the gap.
The third part of Prop. 76 deals with education spending. It revises Prop. 98, which set minimum levels of state spending on public schools from kindergarten through community colleges (K-14).
Prop. 98 says school spending must increase by a combination of growth in enrollment and per capita personal income. When spending drops below Prop. 98 levels, the money must be repaid. The amount owed to schools is $3.8 billion, and Prop. 76 agrees to repay it.
Under Prop. 76, if revenues drop below Prop. 98 levels, the state won't have to repay the money, nor would the repayment of the $3.8 billion raise minimum guarantees. It would still take a two-thirds vote of the Legislature to suspend Prop. 98. Schools won't be shortchanged. Spending will rise with enrollment and personal income, which usually exceeds inflation rates. Also, yearly appropriations above Prop. 98 limits can be made.
Proposition 75
Proposition 75 is designed to level the political playing field so California politics is not overwhelmed by a few powerful public employee unions.
The measure requires public employee unions to get written permission from individual members each year in order to spend dues for political purposes.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that individual union members do not have to pay dues that go toward politics. However, unions assume consent unless a member requests that his or her dues not be used for political purposes. Few union members come forward to ask for the return of part of their dues.
The result is that public employee unions have huge sums to spend on political issues and candidates that many of their members may oppose. Often union financing of a particular candidate is the deciding factor in elections at the state and local levels. Then the elected candidates are beholden to union demands at the expense of the public interest.
For example, when there are negotiations for public employee contracts, everyone is on the same side of the table. In the private sector, unions must face corporate executives who represent stockholder interests. There is a balance, which is why Prop. 75 does not include unions that represent workers in private businesses. Prop. 75 is simple fairness. It gives individual public workers a choice on how their union dues are spent.
Proposition 74
Proposition 74 increases the number of years a teacher needs to work to obtain tenure from two to five. It also states that two consecutive poor performance evaluations constitute unsatisfactory performance for the purpose of dismissing tenured employees.
The idea behind Prop. 74 is to raise the level of teacher performance in California schools. By extending the probationary period for teachers, school officials would have a longer time to evaluate new teachers.
Currently, school boards have only 18 months (from September of the first year to March 15 of the second year) to decide if a new teacher has the ability to do his or her job. That is not enough time to evaluate a new teacher fresh out of college.
Prop. 74 also removes some of the many regulations that currently make it all but impossible to dismiss a deficient tenured teacher. Poorly performing teachers, who should have left the profession, instead populate underperforming schools, which need the best teachers.
Tenured teachers could not be dismissed for no reason. It still would take at least two years to accumulate two bad performance reviews. Teachers who received dismissal notices would have the right to an administrative hearing. Prop. 74 could go a long way in removing unqualified teachers from the classroom. No longer would someone with inadequate skills have job security for life after just two years on the job.
Proposition 77
Proposition 77, reforms how legislative and congressional districts are drawn. It takes the job of reapportionment out of the Legislature and places in the hands of a panel of three retired judges who must follow strict rules on drawing district lines. Political party registration cannot be considered. The Times endorsed this proposition earlier this month.
If the four reforms are approved, this state will be on the way toward a political process that is fairer to average Californians, a state government that is more fiscally responsible and a school system with fewer bad teachers. We strongly recommend that they vote for Propositions 74, 75, 76 and 77. It is a reform package that the state has needed for decades.
Thanks for all your posting on this topic!
Prop. 98 is the real problem. It is the one that earmarked all that money for schools. Prop. 76 can come out and abolish it, but is significantly reduces the poer of Prop. 98.
And part of the construction is for highway construction -- CA has one of the worst roads in the nation, and I am not just saying that, I read some report, which assessed them. CA has been collecting all the money that should have been spent on highway construction and repair, and put them all into the General Fund, from where the Dem Legislature squandered it. Prop. 76 will ensure that money is spent on highways, which we badly need. If it weren't for Prop. 76, the Dems will want to raise taxes "to fix the roads".
Thanks :-)
Every school board and every teachers union says that the sky will fall if the voters ( the people that pay the bills) don`t give them more money. It`s never enough.
Don`t hold them accountable, never demand any standards, and, for GOD`S sake, don`t ask them to dump bad teachers.
I hope people click on some of the informative links I post:
THE CA PROPOSITIONS; Democratic and Republican activists discuss the propositions
Dean urges voters to reject measures governor supports [California]
Davis opposes Schwarzenegger's reform initiatives
CA: Feinstein to oppose Schwarzenegger's special election initiatives
John Alden (Marin cnty Dem Party chairman): Vote no on Prop 76 - we need better leaders
Top Democratic leaders at Penmar Park rally to 'swat' governor's special election measures. Key note speaker: Angelides, Dem candidate for governor
Liberal groups (Moveon.org) try to link special election to broader GOP agenda
Open letter from Phil Angelides (opposing Schwarzenegger and the Propositions)
McClintock's recommendations for CA Propositions
Summary of Recommendations on the CA Propositions by various organizations and parties
CA: McClintock stumps for governor's ballot initiatives
Ad watch: McClintock in radio spot supporting Prop. 76 (includes actual text)
Supporters of the CA Propositions 74-77 include CA Club for Growth, Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Association, Ray Haynes, San Fernando Valley Town Hall Conservatives, Republican Party, and many others. Click on the link for a more comprehensive list.
And you can see from links above who are the ones opposing them: Democrats, Unions, Gray Davis, Howard Dean, MoveOn.org, Phil Angelides, various Dem party chairmen, etc.
"Prop. 76 smoothes out education funding, so that in the low-revenue years, more money will go to education. That's not in doubt... During high revenue years, the Legislature can choose to add more to education..."
North County Times, October 22, 2005Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and his team insist schools won't lose money... "It actually increases education funding when the economy is down, that is unequivocal, that is without debate," said Tom Campbell, the governor's financial director. "Then when the economy is doing well, the legislature could put the money back in or not. It's up to the legislature. Its not automatic."
NBC11, October 11, 2005]:
Permits Govenor, under specified circumstances, to reduce budget appropriations of Govenor's choosing.
What happens when we have another Gov. like Davis?
I agree with everything you said and I have almost 20 years in one school dist. or another to base it on.
The "state" money is only accessed by the districts on a matching funds basis, and it's not a 1:1 ratio. More like a 10:1 with the locals putting up the big numbers. Local districts pass construction bond measures (with either a 55% or 67% weighted majority, depending how the measure is structured) with specific schools targeted for reconstruction or renovation. The locals know if the money is really needed for the facilities and are placing a burden on themselves before accessing any state money.
You would think so but in many cases they don't.
Who would you have make this decision if not the persons actually responsible for paying for it?
What happens when we have another Gov. like Davis?
That is just one of the major problems with everyone pushing this as "Arnold's initiative" or wanting to "give Arnold the tools". I suspect that if this same law, with the same language, was being presented as "Governor Angelides' initiative" or "give Angelides the tools" people would actually wake up, read the language of the law and oppose it vigorously based on its content.
All laws should be evaluated based on their content, not the person temporarily holding office.
It has been my experience that a large number of people believe the school's cry of no money. I have known school districts to threaten that programs will be cut. Many an uninformed parent falls for that one. Schools never threaten to start their cuts at the admin. level.
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.