Comments for Bredt: In favor of Proposition 92 at http://lakeconews.com , comment 1 to 1 out of 1 comments http://lakeconews.com Sat, 07 Nov 2009 18:50:33 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.2 http://lakeconews.com/content/view/2900/927/#comment-2802 Fact Sheet: Who Will Pay? We all support community colleges, but Proposition 92 is flawed and will cause more problems than it claims to solve. Proposition 92 will worsen California’s budget deficit and threaten funding for other critical programs. * Proposition 92 would amend California’s constitution to lock in a huge new state funding mandate for community colleges – with no way to pay for it. * The California Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates the increased spending created by Proposition 92 will reach nearly a billion dollars in the first three years. * California’s chronic budget deficit – projected to increase to over $14 billion in 2008 – will be aggravated by Proposition 92. The Governor is already calling for 10% cuts to state programs across the board – including to public education! * Under Prop. 92, lawmakers will be forced to decide how to pay for the new spending. They could raise sales or income taxes, levy new taxes on other items, or cut funding to health care, programs for the disabled, or education funding, including K-12. * The $6 billion deficit in 2007 led to deep cuts to social services, including programs for the homeless and mentally ill, and the disabled community. Also cut were children’s health outreach programs and clinic care for uninsured children and adults. What other social services will be cut in 2008 as the budget is further aggravated by Proposition 92? Proposition 92 claims to improve access, but doesn’t help low income students with costs at all. * Proposition 92 does nothing to help low income college students with costs, as they already have their tuition fees waived. In fact, according to the state Legislative Analyst, about one fourth of community college students pay no educational fees at all. The California Community College Data Bank says fees were waived for 740,000 low and middle income students in 2005-2006. And a March 2007 study prepared for the Hewlett Foundation by the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education found that 52% of full-time California community college students have their fees waived due to financial need. * California community college fees account for less than 10% of the total educational costs for the typical community college student – with books, transportation, housing, child care and supplies making up the other 90% of costs. If proponents of Prop. 92 really wanted to make a difference, why didn’t they address the majority of costs and barriers to access that students face? Proposition 92 expands bureaucracy, but contains no accountability or independent oversight. * Proposition 92 increases state bureaucracy by creating an expanded state board and giving them “full power” to set salaries and other benefits for additional bureaucrats and administrators - all with no oversight. * Proposition 92 mandates hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars with no accountability provisions to ensure the money ends up helping students. There are no guarantees that the money won’t be wasted on bureaucracy, administration and “overhead.” * Proposition 92 requires no public audits and contains no penalties for misuse of funds. The California Teachers Association, the League of Women Voters, and the California Faculty Association all urge your “No” vote on Proposition 92. * Join teachers, community groups, employer, small businesses and taxpayers in voting “No” on Proposition 92. To join the coalition and for more information, please explore our site. Los Angeles Times: Community colleges do need more money, but this is ballot-box budgeting at its worst. January 7, 2008 Proposition 92 promises California\'s community colleges a stable funding source while lowering student fees. What could be wrong with that? A lot. Community colleges certainly need more money, but Proposition 92 would lock the state into spending hundreds of millions of additional dollars that it doesn\'t have. Lawmakers would have no choice but to rob other higher education programs to meet the new spending commitment. This initiative represents the worst form of ballot-box budgeting, and voters should reject it. Spending mandates like this one have become a recurring nightmare for California. It must have sounded like a good idea to voters in 1988 to require close to half of every state budget to go to K-14 education, including community colleges. But that measure -- Proposition 98, if you\'re keeping track -- has calcified 20 years\' worth of budgets. Instead of giving voters a final say in education spending, it empowered groups with vested interests. The California Teachers Assn., for example, dictated how billions of dollars in taxpayer funds are to be spent over several budget years as a condition of dropping its lawsuit over education spending. Backers of this new measure now want to seize a portion of the education pot for community colleges. They explain that young adults -- the colleges\' traditional student base -- make up a growing segment of California\'s population. But if the dollars should follow the population bulge year to year, lawmakers must have more spending flexibility, not less. It would be foolhardy to mandate spending for decades into the future based on today\'s rapidly shifting demographics. The state today faces a $14.5-billion shortfall that will prevent full funding of education in the coming year, but instead of providing relief, Proposition 92 squeezes the budget at both ends. It requires $300 million in new spending over each of the next three years but removes from the budget, in the form of student fee cuts, $71 million. Fee cuts sound nice, but students who can\'t afford the current fees aren\'t required to pay them. In one recent year, 52% of community college students got fee waivers. Those who do pay enjoy the lowest community college fees in the nation at $20 a unit; Proposition 92 would cut them to $15. Students who avoid community colleges because of cost do so[u] because they can\'t afford housing and books[/u], not because of tuition. [b]Meanwhile, federal funds to cover a variety of costs sit unused because the colleges do such a poor job of directing students to the aid.[/b] Community colleges are the workhorses of California\'s education system, making up for high schools that fail to educate, preparing students for four-year colleges, training adults for careers, providing second and in many cases first chances at an education. They do need help, but they don\'t need Proposition 92. Vote no. Legislative Analyst\'s Office http://www.lao.ca.gov/ballot/2008/92_02_2008.pdf - taxismom Sun, 13 Jan 2008 06:59:32 +0100