Budget alert

Senate narrowly rejects devastating budget proposal but could reconsider it

Earlier today the Senate debated and initially voted down a budget plan that CSBA advocates say would be devastating to public schools because it jeopardizes current and future funding for education and essentially freezes school spending at current—and extremely inadequate—levels. The spending plan, which needed 27 votes, failed, 24 to 15 on a party-line vote. But the vote is on call, and the Senate could reconsider the proposal. CSBA sent a floor alert to members of the Senate, urging them to reject the proposal for these reasons:
The proposed budget reduces funding for education by $1.1 billion below the level of funding recommended in the Conference Committee report. This reduction eliminates even the partial cost-of-living adjustment provided for by the Conference Committee. Eliminating funding for the COLA means less funding than school districts need to maintain the programs and services they provided last year, resulting in a reduction in support for students, ranging from transportation to sports programs. School districts are already operating on very lean budgets and further reductions in education funding will be felt in classrooms across the state.

The Rainy Day Fund would harm California’s long-term interests by restricting spending on public education at a time when schools need additional investments. By any measure, the amount that California spends per child is below the national average and well below the amount needed to meet our indisputably high academic performance standards. This increased rainy day fund would restrict future Californians from increasing investments in public education and other government services, even if they overwhelmingly desired to do so.
Providing the governor with unilateral authority to make mid-year cuts is a dangerous precedent that violates the balance of power between the legislative and executive branches. The current process established by Proposition 58 provides a mechanism for mid-year reductions when a fiscal emergency is declared. This process was successfully demonstrated in February when the Legislature and governor approved $7 billion in spending reductions for 2007-08. These cuts were difficult, but were done in full sunshine with the opportunity for input by stakeholders.
The budget must not rely on short-term revenues and instead must provide a solution that acknowledges that this is a long-term problem. Having a temporary revenue stream as proposed by the three-year sales tax increase will only push the imbalance between revenue and the services that Californians want into the future. When the sales tax increase is repealed, we will be back in the same place, and school districts will once again be forced to make cuts that take us further away from the high quality educational system we want for our students. Let’s fix the problem now, so we can move forward.