Even as California struggles to accommodate the demands generated by the 10-million population increase of the past two decades, it is expected to add millions more by 2025. The size, location, composition, and education of this future population are crucial to how and how effectively state, regional, and local governments can respond. That, in turn, is crucial to the California quality of life in 2025.
Since 1960, the state’s population has more than doubled, reaching 36.5 million by mid-2004. According to PPIC projections, California will add between 7 and 11 million residents over the next two decades, generating a population of 44-to-48 million by 2025. Although the relative growth may be more modest than in the previous two decades, it will place significant strains on public infrastructure, including education facilities, water systems, and roads and transportation networks.
In the next two decades, populations are projected to increase by 45 percent in inland counties, compared to 17 percent in coastal ones, the state’s historical population centers. Inland counties will also have more absolute growth, 4.8 million compared to 4.4 million for their coastal counterparts. The fastest growth rates will be in the Inland Empire (Riverside and San Bernardino counties), the San Joaquin Valley, and the Sacramento metropolitan areas, areas in which the infrastructure is generally not as well developed as in coastal counties. However, despite these uneven growth rates, even by 2040, 60 percent of the state’s residents will still live in coastal counties.
The most striking changes will be in racial/ethnic diversity and age. The Latino and Asian populations will continue to grow, while the white population will either increase very slowly or decline. Today, less than half the state’s population is white. Projections suggest that Latinos will become the largest racial/ethnic group by 2011. Latinos are now the single largest racial/ethnic group of state residents under 30, and almost half of all births are to Latina mothers. The population will also be older. By 2025, the number of seniors will almost double and one in seven Californians will be over 65.
These demographic shifts raise special concerns about how well prepared the future workforce (25-to-64 years old) will be. The answer depends on assumptions about educational progress for age and ethnic groups. Static projections assume the same distribution of education by age and ethnicity that exists today. Dynamic projections assume that past improvements for these groups will continue. Under the static projections, in 2020, a lower percentage of 25-64 year old Californians will be college graduates and a higher percentage will not have completed high school. Under the dynamic projections, the reverse will be true.
Educational Facilities - Just the Facts
School enrollments have risen dramatically since the mid 1980s
California K-12 education enrollments have ebbed and flowed, with surges in the 1960s, falling enrollments in the 1970s, and rapid growth again in the late 1980s and 1990s. Current enrollments are leveling off but are expected to increase again starting around 2010. College and university enrollment growth has been more volatile in response to economic conditions. But these rates began steadily exceeding 2 percent annually after 1995, a trend expected to continue into the early 2010s.
K-12 school facilities have not kept pace with enrollment growth over the past two decades
In the early 1980s, Proposition 13 limited school districts’ ability to pass new bonds. Although state bond measures funded some infrastructure, the net result was a shortage of classrooms as enrollments surged. Districts responded by using portable classrooms and year-round multitrack schooling. The pressure on facilities was exacerbated by the adoption of class-size reduction programs in 1996. In 2000-2001, almost one-third of the state’s K-12 public school classrooms were portable, and one in three children attended schools that were overcrowded or in need of modernization. These conditions were more prevalent in school districts with higher shares of Latino and African American students.
Higher education facilities also faced shortages
By the late 1990s, the alarm was sounded about projected need for new capacity in the state’s colleges and universities. Recent estimates predict a shortfall of space for over 686,000 students by 2013, equivalent to one-third of total full-time-equivalent enrollment. Three-quarters of the shortfall would be experienced by the California Community Colleges (CCC) and one-fifth by the California State University (CSU) system. These estimates assume that trends in state funding, student fees, and course offerings will be similar to those of the late 1990s – but such factors have been increasingly subject to change in response to state budget problems.
Spending on K-12 schools has increased dramatically following institutional changes
Capital outlay spending on K-12 facilities statewide was almost $4 billion higher in 2002 than in 1997, as per capita spending more than doubled. State bonds passed since 2000 authorized $21.4 billion for K-12 facilities. Local funds also increased due to voting reform; in 2000, state voters lowered the required threshold for passing local school bonds from two-thirds to 55 percent. Since then, local bond measures totaling more than $20 billion have been passed; almost half would have failed under the old requirements. With near-term enrollment demand tapering off, these funds should largely address the backlog of needs.
Higher education also benefited from recent bond funding
Since 2000, state bonds providing nearly $4 billion for higher education facilities and local bonds for about $9 billion for community college facilities have been passed. As a result, the situation for the CCC system has improved substantially, with available funds from bonds potentially adequate to cover facilities needs for more than a decade. With limited expectations for outside funding, the CSU system faces the worst scenario, with available bond funds adequate only to cover needs for two-to-four years hence. The University of California system, which traditionally benefits from high levels of non-state funding, may have adequate facilities funds for seven to nine years.
Education policy in California still faces critical questions
New funding has improved prospects for education facilities, but for both K-12 and higher education, facilities account for only about 10 percent of all expenditures. Important questions regarding education quality and access remain unresolved, but these questions relate to the size and use of operating budgets. Policy shifts may influence enrollment demand for higher education. For example, key current debates relate to redefining the roles and missions of the three state systems and raising student fees to help finance them.
TOP
Comments. Questions. Broken links? Bad spelling! Incorrect Grammar? Let me know at webmaster.
Last modified: June 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.
