Education Budget on Hit List

Governor will propose cutting $2.2 billion. Angry educators blast him for reneging on last year's agreement to protect school funding.

By Evan Halper, Los Angeles Times, Janaury 6, 2006

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will propose cutting state spending on K-12 education and community colleges by $2.2 billion when he presents his budget Monday, administration officials said.

The news came to school officials as they also were learning of the governor's plan to weaken Proposition 98, a constitutional provision to guarantee that education gets a set share of state revenues.

"We are left absolutely speechless by his proposal to suspend and amend Prop. 98 and resolve the state's fiscal troubles at the direct expense of 6 million public schoolchildren," said Scott P. Plotkin, executive director of the California School Boards Assn.

The governor's proposal would implement across-the-board budget cuts when the state overspends. Schools, like all other programs, would endure large, unanticipated reductions if the state budget falls out of balance.

State Supt. of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell called the spending proposals "devastating" and education groups immediately began mobilizing to fight the governor.

Schwarzenegger had vowed to protect schools from such cuts in return for their acceptance of billions of dollars in reductions last year to help balance the current budget. But Finance Director Tom Campbell told the school groups Wednesday afternoon that the governor would not be able to honor that deal. The administration will instead propose using $2.2 billion owed education to help close the state's projected $8.1-billion shortfall.

As the governor prepared to cut education, however, he said in his State of the State speech Wednesday that schools are already failing: About 30% of high school students do not graduate, he said.

And in a move that probably will draw further fire from educators, he proposed that teachers be paid based on merit rather than seniority.

"This is war," said Brett McFadden, legislative advocate for the Assn. of California School Administrators. "We are going to be out in the streets, in the schools, at the PTAs. We had a deal. We shook hands and put it in writing."

That deal began to unravel, however, when the nonpartisan legislative analyst's office reported in November that education spending was projected to grow much faster than originally anticipated. Voter-approved formulas automatically set aside a specific share of all revenue that comes into the state for education, and more revenue than projected has been coming in.

The analyst suggested that the state could take as much as $2.8 billion of that money away from schools through the middle of next year, and they still would have enough to cover enrollment growth and cost-of-living adjustments.

The administration has decided to proceed with that proposal, but has adjusted the amount to $2.2 billion.

In proposing the cut, the governor would be taking on one of the state's most politically potent groups, with a grass-roots network of tens of thousands of parents and the financial resources to mount an aggressive campaign in opposition.

But Campbell said education spending would still go up 7% despite the cut. The increase without the cut would have been double, he said, and the administration could not justify that in a year when so many other programs face drastic reductions.

"It is just not responsible with an overall budget gap of this size for any one item — even an item as important as this one — to go up that much," Campbell said. "The governor has the duty to represent all people, and to be fair in the face of different circumstances."

Democrats were circumspect about the proposal.

"This is just the opening shot and we have a long way to go in this process," said Assembly Budget Committee Chairman John Laird (D-Santa Cruz).

Education groups, meanwhile, called the governor's proposal to subject schools to unilateral budget cuts unacceptable.

"When you do across-the-board cuts it means you have no priorities," said Kevin Gordon, executive director of the California Assn. of School Business Officials. "We need leaders that have priorities. That's Public Policy 101."

But Campbell argued that the proposal would protect schools from the kinds of cuts they are now enduring, as it would prohibit the state from borrowing from one program to pay for another.

As for programs such as schools suffering because of overspending in unrelated areas, Campbell said, "That's how it works in a family. When you have a particular crisis, everyone spends less. It's how average Californians deal with it."

TOP

Comments. Questions. Broken links? Bad spelling! Incorrect Grammar? Let me know at webmaster.
Last modified: January 6, 2005

Disclaimer: This website is the sole responsibility of Mike McMahon. It does not represent any official opinions, statement of facts or positions of the Alameda Unified School District. Its sole purpose is to disseminate information to interested individuals in the Alameda community.