Chicago Sun Times Editorial: Real hurdle to education reform is poverty

———————- AND  ————————–

First Overview Hearing on the 2013-14 State Budget Proposal (from CCCI_independents)

In the first of a series of overview hearings by the full Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee, Committee Members received an outline of the Governor Jerry Brown’s proposed 2013-14 State Budget. Representing Governor Brown, Department of Finance Chief Deputy Director Michael Cohen echoed Governor Brown’s call for fiscal discipline, living within the state’s means, and keeping existing cuts in place. Cohen provided the Committee with a brief synopsis of the Governor’s proposals, including major K-14 education policies: Proposition 39 funds, Adult Education shift, and tuition and fee freezes.
Legislative Analyst’s Overview
Serving as the Legislature’s provider of fiscal and policy advice, Legislative Analyst Mac Taylor highlighted the major points from the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) analysis of the Governor’s proposed State Budget. Agreeing with Governor Brown’s figures, for the most part, the LAO finds that the state’s expenditures and revenues are “roughly in balance” for the first time in many years. While the Governor’s approach of fiscal discipline is commended by the LAO, Taylor highlighted the risk of the short-term nature of Proposition 30 funds and California’s volatile revenue structure. Stressing this volatility, Taylor discussed this month’s increased revenues (see “January Personal Income Tax Payments Boom” in the current edition of the Community College Update), explaining that the influx of funds could be accelerated revenues from within the current budget year or from the next budget year, or could be actual, unanticipated, additional revenues. Taylor cautioned that the Legislature be careful before thinking of spending that money.
Regarding the Governor’s policy proposals, one of the major concerns raised by the LAO is the use of Proposition 39 energy-related funding over the next five years exclusively for community college and K-12 school districts (a total of $450 million in 2013-14, $49.5 million for California Community College’s [CCC] specifically) and that all Proposition 39 funds would count towards the Proposition 98 guarantee. The LAO contends that this is a serious departure from the longstanding view of how revenues are to be treated for the purposes of Proposition 98 and directly contrary to what the voters were told in the official voter guide for Proposition 39. (The LAO believes that funds should not be calculated for the Proposition 98 guarantee if they cannot be appropriated by the Legislature for general purposes.) Accordingly, the LAO recommends that the Legislature exclude the Proposition 39 funds from the Proposition 98 calculation and count the $450 million as non-Proposition 98 expenditures. If the Legislature were to take these two recommendations, roughly $190 million would be available in additional operational Proposition 98 support for CCC and schools.
Senators picked up on these concerns in their questions, asking whether including all Proposition 39 funds into the Proposition 98 guarantee could make education funding more unstable in the future if the revenues do not materialize or are not accounted for properly. Other concerns were raised on whether a per-student distributional formula is the best method or whether the funds should be targeted to districts based on some factor of need, while not penalizing districts that have already been able to make efficiencies.
Addressing the Governor’s proposal to shift Adult Education to the CCC, Cohen stated the Governor believes it is the “right time” to streamline the current “bifurcated” system and characterized the proposal as the first year of such a transition. Taylor raised concerns that some CCC districts might not be prepared to assume responsibility for Adult Education programs or consider Adult Education as part of their educational mission. He also questioned the proposal’s plan to allocate funds based solely on existing service levels. Taylor recommended the Legislature consider the alternative approach laid out in their recent “Restructuring California’s Adult Education System” report (see “LAO Recommendations for Adult Education” in the January 11, 2013, Community College Update).
Questions from Senators expressed concerns of access to Adult Education courses if responsibility is shifted to CCC and whether CCC would be required to provide such classes. Cohen stated that CCC could choose to contract with K-12 schools that are currently providing Adult Education, but that the block grant would require that the funds CCC receive be used for Adult Education.
Cohen reiterated the Governor’s expectation that the community colleges and university systems will maintain current fee and tuition levels through 2016-17. While a popular idea with the public and Legislature, Taylor cautions that artificially freezing tuition levels while costs increase leads to tuition spikes when the State Budget goes through a downturn, which is the cycle the higher education system has just gone through. Instead, Taylor suggests a cost-sharing model between fees and state support that would produce a more-stable fee structure.
Next Steps
State Budget trailer bill language is due to the Legislature by February 1, which will provide many of the details needed to more fully analyze the Governor’s proposals. Expect a more detailed discussion at the overview hearing for the higher education proposals, scheduled for February 14.
—Michelle McKay Underwood
posted 01/24/2013