Paul Wellman
Adams Elementary School
Propping Up Education
Officials Expect Cuts and Cutbacks if Tax Initiative Fails
Thursday, September 13, 2012
If Governor Jerry Brown’s tax proposal on November’s ballot fails, it will take about eight weeks before the dust settles and the cuts come down from on high. But come down they will.
And like many cuts these days, they will hit in areas that hurt the most — like, in this case predominantly, education. If Proposition 30 is rejected by the voters, the state’s main operating budget — which was approved in June — will have to be cut by an estimated $6 billion this year alone, with the majority of it hitting our schools.
The tax will only hit the state’s wealthy while paying down California’s debt, proponents say. Opponents of the proposition, which include the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association and the National Federation of Independent Business California, say the proposition is a small-business killer, a tax raise with no reform, and a tax raise that politicians can spend as they please.
Proposition 30 will increase the sales-tax rate by one-quarter of a cent from 2013 through 2016. Personal income tax on the wealthy, who currently pay 9.3 percent, would also be increased — an additional one-percent marginal tax rate on individuals who make between $500,000 and $600,000 a year, an additional 2 percent for those between $600,000 and $1 million, and an additional 3 percent on those whose income is in excess of $1 million. These increases would run from the 2012 tax year through the 2018 tax year.
The increases, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office, would impact about one percent of the state’s income-tax filers, who currently contribute about 40 percent of state personal income taxes.
The Legislative Analyst’s Office anticipates the measure bringing in $6.8 billion, while Brown has said it could bring in as much as $9 billion. “That’s a big spread,” said Meg Jetté, the finance guru for the Santa Barbara School District. “What if it’s not $9 billion, it’s $6.8 billion? It wouldn’t cover everything.”
To make matters more uncertain, there is a competing tax measure on the ballot that would raise personal income tax rates on most taxpayers in the state for 12 years. It would raise an estimated $10 billion next year and would be allocated for education and the state’s bond debt. But the way the money can be used is much more limited, and the money is outside the state budget process. Proposition 38 is not polling as well as Brown’s measure.
A poll conducted in early August by USC showed support for the governor’s proposition at 55 percent. However, that same poll showed public concern over how government was spending and supervising the money it already receives from taxes. For example, here in Santa Barbara County, three public employees have been arrested for allegedly misappropriating public funds for personal use.
Brown has been working at the state level to cut costs and eliminate waste while, here in Santa Barbara, officials have spent the last several years slashing away at their budgets and are already operating at levels lower than have been seen in years. The county has instituted some pension reform measures, and there are fewer staff members and no raises.
By Paul Wellman (file)
California Governor Jerry Brown
Here’s a rundown of what local officials anticipate will be the impact if Gov. Brown’s Prop. 30 fails to pass in November.
UCSB
Last month, UCSB Vice Chancellor Gene Lucas predicted the school could face cuts near $40 million if Prop. 30 fails. The university’s budget has already been cut by $155 million over the last two years, he said.
The UC Board of Regents has endorsed Prop. 30, saying that “the ability of the University of California to ensure the high-quality education that Californians have come to expect will be jeopardized if the state is unable to adequately fund UC’s core mission.” Estimates are that it would lose $375 million.
The UC system is now funded at 1997 levels, despite the fact it has 75,000 more students enrolled than it did that year. If Prop. 30 does not pass, Lucas said, UC Regents must consider a 20-percent tuition increase.
S.B. City College
“It’s such an important initiative for higher education,” Lori Gaskin, SBCC president, explained over the phone last week. “Our state, to me, was founded on an elegant and brilliant principle — that everyone who has a desire for higher education can achieve that.”
Community colleges in California are looking at a $338-million hit if Prop. 30 doesn’t pass, on top of $800 million in cuts over the last few years.
This year, Gaskin can’t plan for anything at SBCC — named just last week as one of the top community colleges in the nation — until she knows the fate of Prop. 30. If it doesn’t pass, she’ll have to institute another $4.6 million in cuts, or the removal of 200 course sections. She avoided doing it for the fall semester, which means if Prop. 30 fails to pass, Gaskin will have to institute major cut in the spring session. “It’s a tragedy waiting to happen for our students,” she said.
By Paul Wellman
Santa Barbara High School
The Santa Barbara School District, in recent years, has trimmed more than $20 million from its budget. This year, the district has budgeted for the worst and already instituted
seven furlough days for the year, just in case Prop. 30 doesn’t pass. “We can’t get caught with our pants down,” Assistant Superintendent Jetté said.
As part of those furloughs, the district reduced the school year by five days this year, and under state law, it can reduce the year by 15 days total over a two-year period. So, if it must, it can take away another 10 days next year.
Should Prop. 30 pass, district officials would like to reinstate those five days of teaching, plus two days of teacher work days (this would have to be negotiated with the teachers union).
The annual cuts have already been devastating. Maintenance has almost ground to a halt. Kindergarten through 3rd grade and high school classes are seeing their biggest class sizes ever. “We’ve cut every possible area we could where we thought there was fluff,” Jetté said. “We’ve pulled every trick out of the hat; now all we have is people.”
While the majority of the cuts would come in education, there are other impacts, as well, according to Assistant County CEO Terri Maus-Nisich, who monitors what is happening at the state level for the county. Courts would see cuts of $125 million — the equivalent of three days of closure per month — while CalFire would have $15 million (about 10 percent of its budget) sliced. State parks reductions would eliminate beach lifeguards and reduce the number of park rangers and game wardens. “It is very important for local governments to remain vigilant,” Maus-Nisich said in an email. “Should other shortfalls in revenues occur beyond what the state [has projected], it may again be necessary to look back to local governments.”
Comments
So in all these reviews of potential local budget cuts, has anyone looked at the salary, benefits, and pension of Assistant County CEO Terri Maus-Nisich and her like?
John_Adams (anonymous profile)
September 13, 2012 at 10:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)
John-Adams, I think that is where people draw the line on increased Tax & Cuts in services.
American's especially californian's understand that money has to come from somewhere and the Tax increases are a needed evil but where does the money go is our largest hurdle.
Administrative pay for those who pose the Taxing and Service cuts want to be non-defineable in where the money will be spent giving the people a blanket answer for service payment but we the public want defined answer's as to where the money will go and for what?
I question those who hold the purse-strings when the collection of Tax monies come in, where is our payments going, who will get PAID, and who will get cut or the services will have to go but these pillars of our society refuse to give both names and numbers regarding what the money will be used for.
Until that day comes where an honest and definitive direction for the funds are going, the balking of taxation and removal of service will continue to plague our Government.
dou4now (anonymous profile)
September 13, 2012 at 11:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Gov. Brown is trying to blackmail the taxpayer into voting for this proposition by holding the schools hostage. Legislative aides got a big fat raise earlier this year. Brown also just negotiated a sweetheart deal with the public employee unions. He wants one the highest taxed states in the country to go even higher. There's money for education in the current budget, it's just that Brown is more interested in giving money to other interests he is beholden to. When Prop 98 passed, all that money was supposed to go to schools. Brown found a legal way to spend it elsewhere. I'm sure he'll try to do the same with prop. 30 money if it passes.
Botany (anonymous profile)
September 13, 2012 at 2:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Botany, we need to pass Prop 30 as well as local parcel tax measures A and B. There is certainly NOT "money for education in the current budget" and if you think so go visit some public schools!! This tax "would impact about one percent of the state’s income-tax filers," and they can absorb this hit easily. Get over your moaning about how highly taxed we are, we aren't.
DrDan (anonymous profile)
September 14, 2012 at 2:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)
DrDan - "There is certainly NOT "money for education in the current budget" and if you think so go visit some public schools!!"
You completely missed my point. We have the money, we just CHOOSE NOT TO spend it on schools. Our state government prefers to spend the money on other things. That's evidenced by the amount of tax Californians pay compared to other states, yet the amount spent on actually educating our students is much lower compared to other states.
We ARE currently one of the highest taxed states in the country, that's a fact anyone that's actually examined the facts can't deny. Yeah, and we think we can continue to dump all of CA's frivilous spending on the top income earners. That may work to a point, but many of these high earners can change their "legal" residence to another state quite easily. At what point will we make it worthwhile for them to do so? I guess you'd like to find out.
Botany (anonymous profile)
September 14, 2012 at 2:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
There is plenty of money in the budget if there wasn't a teacher's union that received a large chunk of money. Let's face it, CA schools are doing horrible compared to the rest of the country and places like China. Why are we dumping more money into them?
Muggy (anonymous profile)
September 14, 2012 at 3:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"There is plenty of money in the budget if there wasn't a teacher's union that received a large chunk of money."
-- Muggy
How big is that chunk of money? What line item does it appear under in the budget?
EastBeach (anonymous profile)
September 14, 2012 at 5:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Teachers need to eat and pay bills too. Why is it that teacher's get the bulk of the hate when it's the politicians and upriver admins who have mismanaged and in some cases sabotaged the public education system. teachers are amongst the most valuable human resources any community can have.
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
September 14, 2012 at 5:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Teachers don't get hate, but the unions get well deserved hate. It's not even the early retirement that I mind so much, but the unions desire to perpetuate rules that keep bad teachers employed and a system strictly based on seniority without any regard for performance. This is a system that denigrates the quality of education our children receive. That's why the unions get such a well-deserved hatred.
Botany (anonymous profile)
September 14, 2012 at 6:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
At this point I can not support more taxes until we see real reform; pensions, teachers senority and proper evaluations.
We also need to adress the amount of money being spent on prisons, the train to nowhere, and many other pet CA projects.
The pension reform Brown signed is a joke and he is holding taxpayers hostage by saying cuts will come from schools unless his tax iniative is passed.
Let's get school vouchers and allow choices, public charter schools and private schools are the way to go.
loneranger (anonymous profile)
September 17, 2012 at 12:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
@loneranger, The State legislature just passed some significant pension reform, it's not a joke! .... and why take out on education those problems you note with "the amount of money being spent on prisons, the train to nowhere, and many other pet CA projects"?? They don't connect. We've been cutting public education in Calif. for five years...when is it enough, eh? Vouchers are horrible and are simply a way to suffocate public education. Private schools are WAY TOO EXPENSIVE for anyone below the 5%, that's a fantasy
Yes on parcel taxes A and B, and on Prop. 30!
DrDan (anonymous profile)
September 17, 2012 at 1 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Dr Dan - as much as I would love to support education, I can not. It is like the college kid that spent all their money on drugs and can not pay for school books so they are asking for more.
We have no control ove where CA actually spends the tax money, they continue to make bad choices and then ask for more for eduction.
Charter schools are a great option for all, and what about a poposition for school vouchers? Vouchers have worked well in other states.
Another posible solution is to get to the point where all of our local schools are basic aide, receiving above the minimum CA per student funding. That would require the elimination of the final RDA projects and getting the county, city and workforce housing to contribute a fair share to the schools. For years everyone has robbed school funding for RDA and housing projects, it is time to reverse the trend.
loneranger (anonymous profile)
September 17, 2012 at 3:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Vote for A, B, and Prop. 30!
DrDan (anonymous profile)
September 17, 2012 at 5:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Vote NO on 30!!! It will be nothing more than more wasted money.
loneranger (anonymous profile)
September 17, 2012 at 7:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Back in 1975, Jerry Brown created this mess by signing the Rodda Act.
In 2009, the teacher's union's income was $186,000,000 - tax exempt.
In 1988, Pro 98 passed that required 40% of CA's budget to be spent on education for K-12 and community colleges.
In the 1990s, school vouchers was going to be an option but the teacher's unions kept the measure off the ballot.
In 1998, the teacher's union spent $7,000,000 to defeat Prop 8 - which would have made student performance as criteria for teacher reviews and for teachers to pass exams before they could keep teaching.
In 2002, the union spent $26,000,000 to defeat Prop 38 (another school voucher proposal) and in 2005 spent $58,000,000 to stop initiative that would have capped state spending and to fire underperforming teachers.
Muggy (anonymous profile)
September 18, 2012 at 10:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Actually Proposition 13 created this mess, everyone not in denial knows it. It's what created all these other taxes as well as the shortfalls.
STOP blaming the teachers and put the blame where it belongs, freeloading Howard Jarvis/Mitt Romney types.
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
September 18, 2012 at 11:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I never blamed the teachers. It's the unions (that the teachers must be apart of if they want a job).
Muggy (anonymous profile)
September 18, 2012 at 11:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)
There is nothing wrong with Prop 13.
If you have a Picasso that you paid $1,000 for 50 years ago and paid tax on the $1,000 and your neighbor has a Picasso they got last year for $1M paid sales tax on the $1M, is that wrong? You can give your Picasso to your child and the child does not have to pay sales tax.
Prop 13 follows this same logic as sales tax, taxing based on purchase value. In my mind it is more fair than revaluing yearly as the buyer knows what they are going to be paying when they buy their property.
CA collects enough overall tax, they just spend it in a way that seems crazy.
I firmly believe we do not need more tax revenue we just need to require the state to allocate the money differently. More to schools, less to prisons, welfare, trains and pensions.
loneranger (anonymous profile)
September 18, 2012 at 4:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I am not in denial and I love Prop 13. One minor detail that 13 haters seem to ignore is the fact that in every affluent part of California there are comparatively very few homes in the same hands since the initiative passed. In other words, all of the horror stories about owners only paying taxes on a $20 or $30k basis are mostly fallacy. How many homes have been for sale in SB for under $500k over the past 10 years or so?
Further, does progressive SB want to put old people out of their homes because of increasing taxes?
italiansurg (anonymous profile)
September 19, 2012 at 6:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)