HIGHLIGHTS OF ECONOMIC STIMULUS PLAN

Education items in bold

The Associated Press

Posted: January 29th, 2009 09:48 AM GMT-05:00

Highlights of the $819 billion economic recovery plan drafted by House Democrats and President Barack Obama's economic team. Additional debt costs would add $347 billion over 10 years. Many provisions expire in two years.

SPENDING

Aid to the poor and unemployed - $43 billion to provide extended unemployment benefits through Dec. 31, increase them by $25 a week and provide job training; $20 billion to increase food stamp benefits by 13 percent; $4 billion to provide a one-time additional Supplemental Security Income payment; $2.5 billion in temporary welfare payments; $1 billion for home heating subsidies; and $1 billion for community action agencies.

Health care - $40 billion to subsidize health care insurance for the unemployed under the COBRA program or provide health care through Medicaid; $87 billion to help states with Medicaid; $20 billion to modernize health information technology systems; $4 billion for preventative care; $1.5 billion for community health centers; $420 million to combat avian flu; $335 million for programs that combat AIDS, sexually transmitted diseases and tuberculosis.

Infrastructure - $43 billion for transportation projects, including $30 billion for highway and bridge construction and repair and $12 billion for mass transit, including $7.5 billion to buy transit equipment like buses; $31 billion to build and repair federal buildings and other public infrastructure; $19 billion in water projects; $10 billion in rail and mass transit projects.

Education - $41 billion in grants to local school districts; $79 billion in state fiscal relief to prevent cuts in state aid; $21 billion for school modernization; $16 billion to boost the maximum Pell Grant by $500 to $5,350; $2 billion for Head Start.

Energy - $32 billion to fund a so-called "smart electricity grid" to reduce waste; $6 billion to weatherize modest-income homes.

Science and technology - $10 billion for science facilities; $6 billion to bring high-speed Internet access to rural and underserved areas; $1 billion for the 2010 Census.

Housing - $13 billion to repair and make more energy-efficient public housing projects, allow communities to buy and repair foreclosed homes, and help the homeless.

Environment - $3.2 billion to clean up Superfund and waste sites, leaking underground storage tanks, nuclear sites and military bases, as well as $400 million for habitat restoration projects and $850 million to prevent forest fires.

Law enforcement - $4 billion in grants to state and local law enforcement to hire officers and purchase equipment.

TAXES

Individuals

_ $500 per-worker, $1,000 per-couple tax cut for two years, costing about $145 billion. Workers could expect to see about $20 a week less withheld from their paychecks starting in June. Millions of Americans who don't make enough money to pay federal income taxes could file returns next year and receive checks.

_ Greater access to the $1,000 per-child tax credit for the working poor in 2009 and 2010, at a cost of $18.3 billion. Under current law, workers must make at least $8,500 to receive the credit. The change eliminates the floor, meaning more workers who pay no federal income taxes could receive checks.

_ Increase the earned-income tax credit - which provides money to the working poor - for families with at least three children, at a cost of $4.7 billion.

_Provide a $2,500 tax credit for college tuition and related expenses for 2009 and 2010, at a cost of $10.3 billion. The credit is phased out for couples making more than $160,000.

_ Repeal a requirement that a $7,500 first-time homebuyer tax credit be paid back over time for homes purchased from Jan. 1 to July 1, unless the home is sold within three years, at a cost of $2.6 billion. The credit is phased out for couples making more than $150,000.

Businesses

_ Extend a provision allowing businesses buying equipment such as computers to speed up the depreciation of that equipment through 2009, at a cost of $5 billion.

_ Provide an infusion of cash into money-losing companies by allowing them to claim tax credits on past profits dating back five years instead of two, at a cost of $15 billion.

_ Repeal a Treasury provision that allowed firms that buy money-losing banks to use more of the losses as tax credits to offset the profits of the merged banks for tax purposes. The change would increase taxes on the merged banks by $7 billion over 10 years.

_ Subsidize locally issued bonds for school construction, teacher training, economic development and infrastructure improvements, at a cost of $35.5 billion.

_ Extend tax credits for renewable energy production, at a cost of $13 billion.

_ Extend and increase tax credits to homeowners who make their homes more energy efficient, at a cost of $4.3 billion. Homeowners could receive tax credits of up to $1,500 for upgrading furnaces and hot water heaters and making other improvements through 2010.

UNA ACTITUD MEZQUINA | A PETTY ATTITUDE

Una actitud mezquina

La Opinión Editorial 

2009-01-23 - La nación entera pasa por una difícil situación económica que requiere sacrificios y voluntad para tomar decisiones positivas. Estos últimos días el traspaso de poder en Washington D.C. creó un ambiente de esperanza donde todo parece posible y se establecen los objetivos a cumplir.

¡Qué contraste con el sentimiento que hoy prevalece en California!

Para ser justo, lo ocurrido en Washington tuvo características históricas de por sí, incomparables en el espectro político nacional. Sin embargo, el mensaje de compromiso para superar los escollos es aplicable a todo el país, incluso a California.

Sacramento se ha convertido en una caldera de disputas e inflexibilidad que le está costando sufrimiento y dinero a los californianos. Ahora los bonos estatales de la deuda están a punto a ser devaluados hasta convertirse en los de menor valor del país.

El estancamiento político en el presupuesto es consecuencia de reglas anacrónicas que son aprovechadas por intereses políticos ajenos al bienestar de California.

Los legisladores republicanos se autoexcluyen de la realidad al rechazar aumento de impuestos, como excusa para no cumplir con su deber de actuar ante la crisis.

El gobernador, por su parte, es un obstáculo al vetar un presupuesto con dolorosos recortes al no incluir flexibilidad para las normas ambientales y laborales promovidas por el sector privado.

Cuan mezquina es la actitud en nuestro estado, que falta de grandeza para buscar el bien común en los momentos difíciles. El sacrificio debe ser compartido, esa es la lección a aprender.

 

A petty attitude

La Opinión Editorial | La Opinión Translation

2009-01-23 - The entire nation is going through tough economic times requiring sacrifices and the will to make positive decisions. In recent days, the transfer of power in Washington, D.C. created an environment of hope in which anything is possible and the proposed objectives can be achieved.

What a contrast with the current sentiment prevailing in California!

To be fair, what happened in Washington was of historic proportions that are without compare on the national political scene. Nevertheless, the message of commitment to overcome obstacles is applicable nationwide—even in California.

Sacramento has become a cauldron of bickering and inflexibility that is costing Californians pain and money. Now state bonds are about to be downgraded to the lowest level in the nation.

The political stagnation on the budget is a result of anachronistic rules exploited for political interests that have nothing to do with California’s wellbeing.

Republican legislators are avoiding reality —by rejecting tax increases— as an excuse not to fulfill their duty to act in response to the crisis.

For his part, the governor is an obstacle, vetoing a budget with painful program cuts because it did not include flexibility on environmental and labor standards promoted by the private sector.

What a petty attitude we have in our state. What a lack of courage to seek the common good in hard times. Sacrifice must be shared; that is the lesson to be learned.

PROPOSED CUTS FORETELL STATE’S PLIGHT: Both parties appear to be willing to reduce funding for public schools, colleges, transit programs and programs that help a wide range of people with special needs.

Members of both political parties have already agreed on $6 billion in cuts: $3.9 billion K-12 Schools Some of the $3.9 billion in cuts to kindergarten-through-12th-grade education would be offset by declining enrollment in some districts, but there will also be many direct effects in the classroom. The area of school spending that will be hit hardest is funding for textbooks, which would be cut by $417 million. The loss of that money would make some schools unable to update their textbooks, and some districts unable to supply books to every student. More than $277 million would be cut from a program to fund long overdue maintenance in school buildings, including some scheduled "emergency repairs." Plans by many districts to fix leaky roofs, cracked sidewalks and broken heating systems would have to be put off another year. Money for the neediest students would be cut, as would programs to further the professional development and training of teachers. Nearly $110 million set aside for districts to preserve art and music programs would also be on the chopping bock. State funding to train faculty in how to best teach math and reading skills would also be reduced, as would subsidies available to districts that provide after-school child care. And a program initiated to get high-speed Internet access in every district is endangered.

More examples: $657 million State workforce $614 million Aged, blind and disabled $312 million Transit "You can judge a society by how they treat their weakest members."  - Gandhi

 

 

By Jordan Rau and Evan Halper | LA Times

January 26, 2009 -- SACRAMENTO -- Although lawmakers continue to argue over how to resolve the state's fiscal crisis, they already have endorsed $6 billion in spending cuts that provide a painful preview of what is likely to be in store for Californians.

The proposed cuts would mean that money for the state's university systems would decrease. Transportation and schools would take a hit. Funds for regional centers that help treat developmental disabilities in babies and toddlers would decline. Cash to help the elderly, blind and disabled keep up with rising food costs would be slashed.

None of these cuts has been enacted. But the fact that they were included in the fiscal plan that Democrats passed last month -- and have been separately backed by Republicans -- ensures that they will be at the top of the list when lawmakers finally decide how to bridge a budget gap projected to exceed $40 billion within a year and a half.

"With 9.3% unemployment in our state, people are flowing into public benefit offices all over California," said Michael Herald, legislative advocate for the Western Center on Law and Poverty, a Los Angeles-based legal services nonprofit. "This is when people need these programs, and yet our state seems to be headed in a direction of reducing them now."

The $11.2 billion that California would receive from Washington to help wipe out the deficit under a stimulus package expected to be pushed through the House this week would do little to offset these cuts. The federal funds, which would address only a quarter of the state's overall problem, are more likely to be used elsewhere.

One of the provisions both parties have supported in the state Capitol would reduce the maximum monthly grant for low-income blind and disabled Californians. Individual grants would drop from $907 to $870, while couples would see their monthly checks drop from $1,579 to $1,524, according to the state Department of Finance. Those grants were supposed to increase this year and again next year to account for inflation.

Ismael Maldonado, a 20-year old from Pacoima who has glaucoma and asthma, said he may have to skimp on medications if lawmakers cut his grant.

The last time he did that, he said, "I ended up in the hospital emergency room" -- an expense the state's Medi-Cal program had to pick up.

Both political parties have endorsed a plan to save $107 million through 3% reductions in payments to programs that help Californians live with cerebral palsy, autism, epilepsy and mental retardation. These programs, delivered through 21 regional centers, assisted 230,000 people last year, said Bob Baldo, executive director of the Assn. of Regional Center Agencies.

They provide diagnosis and early intervention for infants and toddlers with signs of development disabilities. These centers also provide rides for adults with developmental disabilities to day programs, provide them places to live and line up employment for them.

Baldo said the cuts are likely to mean that therapists working with children in schools will face larger caseloads, potentially reducing the time they can spend with each child. He said the cuts may be enough to force some providers of these services out of business.

A steep dip in school spending has been jointly endorsed. Some of the $3.9 billion in cuts to kindergarten-through-12th-grade education would be offset by declining enrollment in some districts, but there will also be many direct effects in the classroom.

The area of school spending that will be hit hardest is funding for textbooks, which would be cut by $417 million. The loss of that money would make some schools unable to update their textbooks, and some districts unable to supply books to every student.

More than $277 million would be cut from a program to fund long overdue maintenance in school buildings, including some scheduled "emergency repairs." Plans by many districts to fix leaky roofs, cracked sidewalks and broken heating systems would have to be put off another year.

Money for the neediest students would be cut, as would programs to further the professional development and training of teachers. Nearly $110 million set aside for districts to preserve art and music programs would also be on the chopping bock.

State funding to train faculty in how to best teach math and reading skills would also be reduced, as would subsidies available to districts that provide after-school child care. And a program initiated to get high-speed Internet access in every district is endangered. Some schools are still using dial-up technology.

The education reductions erode "the foundation schools are built upon," said Kevin Gordon, a lobbyist for hundreds of school districts.

Both parties have also endorsed cancellation of a 2.94% cost-of-living increase for the state's welfare program. That would mean a family of three receiving the maximum monthly grant of $723 would not receive an extra $21 a month this year.

However, welfare recipients may ultimately get a reprieve because Congress is allotting more money to the states for this purpose, Herald said.

Legislative leaders from both parties declined to say which reductions are still being discussed in their negotiations with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, explaining that they did not want to jeopardize a deal. Democratic leaders have said they will not enact cuts until Republicans agree to some tax increases, and that standoff has led to the state's current budget impasse.

The state universities would be faced with tens of millions of dollars more in cuts after already scaling back operations in recent months. Earlier this month, the University of California announced it would eliminate 2,300 freshman slots for Californians in the coming budget year. The total number of freshmen admitted will be reduced from 37,600 to 35,300.

"The lack of sufficient state funding leaves us no choice," UC President Mark G. Yudof said when the reduction was announced Jan. 14.

The decline in funds comes at a time when applications to the UC system from Californians are soaring. The system has cut back faculty development programs. University officials say the latest round of budget cuts could lead to further reductions in student services and an increase in the ratio of students per faculty member.

The Cal State system has also been cutting back at a time when tuition is scheduled to increase 10%. Student fees in that system have more than doubled since 2002, when they were $1,428. They are scheduled to increase to $3,354. Financial aid, meanwhile, is being scaled down.

Schools in the system report canceling dozens of classes. And a hiring freeze for nonessential staff has been put in place systemwide.

"We are risking our long-term economic competitiveness as well as denying students the ability to attend college," said Jean Ross, director of the California Budget Project, a nonprofit Sacramento research group that aims to help low- and middle-income people.

A college education, she said, "is the best guarantee of a job that brings with it sufficient income to support a family."

PTA LEGISLATIVE ALERT & PRESS RELEASE

Legislative Alert
January 15, 2009

 

 

California State Budget:

Our responsibility to children cannot be cut in bad economic times

Action Needed – you need not be a PTA member to act for children:

Please call or email your state assembly member, state senator and the governor right away and deliver the following messages:

• We must find a balanced approach to the budget crisis that includes sufficient new revenues to protect children and the future of California.
• Support continued funding for programs and services that help ensure that all children can succeed, such as smaller class sizes, arts and physical education, science, counselors, nurses, librarians, and health and social services for children.
• We cannot build a world class public education system by going backwards in funding for education and other children's services.

To find your legislators' contact information, click here. To contact the governor, click here.

Background

With a worsening economy, state legislators and the Governor are faced with difficult decisions to adopt a balanced state budget. The Governor's 2009-2010 budget proposal includes deep cuts to education, health and human services as well as tax increases and borrowing.

In releasing the proposed budget last week, the Governor stated:

"California, like the rest of the nation is in the midst of a severe economic downturn. The combined effect of the state's continuing structural budget deficit and the loss of revenues resulting from the economic downturn results in a budget gap of $41.6 billion, just under half of the revenues projected for 2009-10. This is the most challenging budget in the state's history. It demands quick action and calls for every type of solution possible, including major spending cuts, revenue increases, borrowing and cash management strategies."

California State PTA issued a press release (copy follows) yesterday in response to the latest budget proposal. In the release, Pam Brady, President, states:

"Don't think for a minute that we don't understand the magnitude of the current financial crisis. Families throughout California are living each day with the realities of the economic downturn. But families also understand that we have a responsibility to children and their future which cannot be compromised in bad economic times.

"We believe the smartest economic stimulus plan for California right now is to invest in the future by investing in the education, health and welfare of our state's children."

The Governor's latest budget proposal would cut an additional $6 billion to public schools over the next 18 months.  When combined with cuts already made to our schools in the current year and proposed accounting maneuvers to delay other payments owed to schools, the total cuts are nearly $11 billion -- not including other cuts to vital children's services.

A recent national study revealed that California recently slipped from 46th to 47th in the nation in terms of per-student funding -- funding which goes to hire and train teachers, provide instructional programs and materials, ensure smaller class sizes, and provide all other aspects of a quality education to every student. 

Next Steps

The Board of Managers of the California State PTA has voted to launch an aggressive campaign to protect children. In the coming weeks we will be providing additional information, resources and advice to help you communicate a strong message for a greater investment in children and against deeper budget cuts.

Budget Details on the Web

Press release issued by PTA in response to the state budget

Education Coalition Response to the Governor's State of the State: California's Schools Face State of Emergency

California Budget Project Analysis

Schwarzenegger seeks education cuts

Governor Holds Press Conference to Discuss State Budget

Legislative Analyst's Office 2009-10 Budget Analysis Series: Overview of the Governor's Budget

Governor's Budget 2009-2010

California State PTA | 2327 L Street | Sacramento | CA | 95816 | info@capta.org

---

press release

CONTACT: Carol Kocivar

Vice President, Communications

(415) 577-1125

Alison apRoberts, Communications Manager

(916) 440-1985, ext. 106

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

January 14, 2009

PTA Responds to State Budget:

Our responsibility to children cannot be cut in bad economic times

Pam Brady, President of the California State PTA, issued the following statement in response to the Governor's budget proposal and ongoing negotiations with legislators.

“Don’t think for a minute that we don’t understand the magnitude of the current financial crisis. Families throughout California are living each day with the realities of the economic downturn. But families also understand that we have a responsibility to children and their future which cannot be compromised in bad economic times.

“We believe the smartest economic stimulus plan for California right now is to invest in the future by investing in the education, health and welfare of our state’s children.

“The latest budget proposal would cut an additional $6 billion to schools. When combined with cuts already made to our schools in the current year and proposed accounting maneuvers to delay other payments owed to schools, we’re looking at total cuts of about $11 billion.

“Cuts of this magnitude fail the basic test of good government. They hurt our children.

“These proposed cuts will completely derail efforts to provide a world-class education to all students. We are already 47th in the nation in terms of how much our state spends per student on education. These cuts are likely to make us dead last.

“The mission of California State PTA is to positively impact the lives of all children and families. We cannot and will not back away from that mission during tough economic times. In fact, these are the times when the children of California need our advocacy the most.

“The 120-member Board of Managers of the California State PTA has voted to launch an aggressive campaign to protect children from drastic budget cuts.”

 

The California State PTA is a branch of the 111-year old National PTA, with nearly one million members statewide. The PTA is the nation's oldest, largest and highest-profile volunteer organization working on behalf of public schools, children and families, with the motto "Every child, one voice." PTA volunteers work in their schools and communities to improve the education, health and welfare of all California children and youth. The PTA also advocates at national, state and local levels for education and family issues. The PTA is non-profit, non-partisan, non-sectarian and non-commercial. For more information, go to www.capta.org.

THE FULL TEXT OF THE GOVERNOR’S STATE-OF-THE-STATE SPEECH

 from SacBee CapitolALERT

“It doesn't make any sense to talk about education, infrastructure, water, health care reform and all these things when we have this huge budget deficit.

“I think you would agree that in recent years California's legislature has been engaged in civil war. Meanwhile, the needs of the people became secondary.

“No one wants to take money from our gang-fighting programs or from Medi-Cal or from education.

“No one wants to pay more in taxes or fees.

“But each of us has to give up something because our country is in an economic crisis and our state simply doesn't have the money.”

January 15, 2009 -- The complete prepared text of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's State of the State address; his 2008 address, as prepared, clocked in at 3,026 words. This year's speech is a mere 1,364 words:

Lt. Governor Garamendi, Chief Justice George, President pro Tem Steinberg, Speaker Bass, Senate Republican Leader Cogdill, Assembly Republican Leader Villines, Members of the legislature, ladies and gentlemen, we meet in times of great hope for our nation.

Although we hear the drumbeat of news about bailouts, bankruptcies and Ponzi schemes, the nation with great anticipation is also awaiting the inauguration of a new president.

Our nation should be proud of what President-elect Obama's election says to the world about American openness and renewal.

President Reagan used to tell about the letter he got from a man who said that you can go to live in Turkey, but you can't become a Turk. You can go to live in Japan, but you cannot become Japanese. And he went through other countries.

"But," the man said, "anyone from any corner of the world can come to America and become an American."

And now, we know that any American child, no matter what corner of the world his father or mother comes from, can even become President of the United States.

What a wonderful national story for us.

This nation rightfully feels the hope of change.

Californians, of course, desire change here in their own state as well.

Yet they have doubts if that is possible.

For months, in the face of a crisis, we have been unable to reach agreement on the largest budget deficit in our history.

We are in our third special session and we've declared a fiscal emergency - and every day that goes by, makes the budget problem that much harder to solve.

As a result of all this, California, the eighth largest economy in the world, faces insolvency within weeks.

The legislature is currently in the midst of serious and good faith negotiations to resolve the crisis, negotiations that are being conducted in the knowledge we have no alternative but to find agreement.

The importance of the negotiation's success goes far beyond the economic and human impact.

People are asking if California is governable.

They wonder about the need for a constitutional convention.

They don't understand how we could have let political dysfunction paralyze our state for so long.

In recent years, they have seen more gridlock in Sacramento than on our roads, if such a thing is possible.

I will not give the traditional State of the State address today, because the reality is that our state is incapacitated until we resolve the budget crisis.

The truth is that California is in a state of emergency.

Addressing this emergency is the first and greatest thing we must do for the people.

The 42 billion dollar deficit is a rock upon our chest and we cannot breathe until we get it off.

It doesn't make any sense to talk about education, infrastructure, water, health care reform and all these things when we have this huge budget deficit.

I will talk about my vision for all of these things... and more... as soon as we get the budget done.

So, no, I did not come today to deliver the normal list of accomplishments and proposals.

I came to encourage this body to continue the hard work you are doing behind closed doors.

There is a context and a history to the negotiations that are underway.

It is not that California is ungovernable. It's that for too long we have been split by ideology.

Conan's sword could not have cleaved our political system in two as cleanly as our own political parties have done.

Over time, ours has become a system where rigid ideology has been rewarded and pragmatic compromise has been punished.

And where has this led?

I think you would agree that in recent years California's legislature has been engaged in civil war.

Meanwhile, the needs of the people became secondary.

Our citizens do not believe that we in government are in touch with their needs.

These needs are not unreasonable.

At the end of the day, most people do not require a great deal from their government.

They expect the fundamentals.

They want to live in safety.

They want a good education for their children.

They want jobs.

They want to breathe clean air.

They want water when they turn on the faucet and electricity when they turn on the switch.

And they want these things delivered efficiently and economically.

One of the reasonable expectations the public has of government is that it will produce a sound and balanced budget.

That is what the legislative leaders are struggling to do right now.

There is no course left open to us but this: to work together, to sacrifice together, to think of the common good - not our individual good.

No one wants to take money from our gang-fighting programs or from Medi-Cal or from education.

No one wants to pay more in taxes or fees.

But each of us has to give up something because our country is in an economic crisis and our state simply doesn't have the money.

In December, we even had to suspend funding that affects 2,000 infrastructure projects that were already underway.

So, now, the bulldozers are silent. The nail guns are still. The cement trucks are parked. This disruption has stopped work on levees, schools, roads, everything.

It has thrown thousands and thousands of people out of work at a time when our unemployment rate is rising.

How could we let something like that happen?

I know that everyone in this room wants to hear again the sound of construction.

No one wants unemployment checks replacing paychecks.

So, I am encouraged that meaningful negotiations are underway. And, as difficult as the budget will be, good things can come out of it.

Because, in spite of the budget crisis, when we have worked together in the past, we have passed measures that moved this state - and even the nation - forward.

When a budget agreement is reached, when some of the raw emotions have passed, I will send to the legislature the package of legislative goals and proposals that a governor traditionally sends.

These proposals are sitting on my desk. Let me tell you, I have big plans.

They include action on the economy, on water, environment, education, health care reform, government efficiency and reform, job creation.

But, our first order of business is to solve the budget crisis.
And I have an idea going forward.

As you know, in the last 20 years of budgeting, only four budgets have been on time.

So, if you don't mind, let me make a little suggestion.

We should make a commitment that legislators - and the governor, too - lose per diem expenses and our paychecks, for every day the budget goes past the constitutional deadline of June 15th.

You have to admit it is a brilliant idea.

I mean, if you call a taxi and the taxi doesn't come, you don't pay the driver.

If the people's work is not getting done, the people's representatives should not get paid either.

That is common sense in the real world.

And I will send you some other reforms, too.

Let me close by saying something about the fires of 2008.

At one point, I got a phone call that we had 875 wildfires burning all at the same time.

I said to myself, how do we deal with this?

The next morning I get a call, "Governor, there are now 2,014 fires burning all at the same time."

The largest number on record.

Imagine, 2,000 fires, a huge challenge and every one of those fires was put out.

You know why? Because we have the best trained, the most selfless, the toughest firefighters in the nation.

Thirteen of whom lost their lives.

They gave their lives for this state.

Ladies and gentlemen, the courageous examples of those firefighters should not be lost on us.

In our own way, we, too, must show courage in serving the public.

Ladies and gentlemen, let this be a year of political courage.

Let us be courageous for the people.

Let us be courageous for the common good of California.

Let us resolve the budget crisis, so that we can get on with the people's work.

Thank you.

SHOOTING YOURSELF IN THE FOOT: Mid-Year Layoffs Undermine Teacher Quality

“When a school district announces mid-year layoffs, there is little doubt about which teachers will get the axe. It’s an exercise in “last-hired, first-fired.” For instance, none of the 2,300 teachers that Los Angeles Unified School District anticipates laying off will have been in the district long enough to earn tenure—a coveted employment status almost entirely separated from serious notions of quality teaching.”

SOURCE: AP/Tina Fineberg

New teachers, like these picking up literature during an orientation for teachers entering the New York City public school system, are often the first to be layed off.

By Robin Chait, Raegen Miller | Center for American Progress

January 14, 2009 -- Each week brings new headlines about the symptoms of economic recession. One of these symptoms, mid-year layoffs of teachers, is particularly troubling. The past few months have seen layoffs announced in Los Angeles, Memphis, and Dallas. Mid-year layoffs tend to happen when state tax revenues fall below anticipated levels.

Education funding is the single largest expense in most state budgets and therefore cannot escape the economic pinch. Data released by the National Governors Association and the National Association of State Budget Officers shows that together, 31 states “face existing fiscal 2009 budget gaps totaling $30 billion.” Education Week reports a 9 percent cut to education funding in Alabama, and major, imminent cuts to education budgets in New York, California, and Virginia. We haven’t seen the last of mid-year layoffs. Indeed, many more are projected in school districts from California to Massachusetts to Florida.

Mid-year layoffs create obvious hardships and turmoil. The laid-off teachers are left in the lurch, classes are consolidated, discretionary programs are cut, and teachers’ relationships with students are severed. Nobody argues that students’ experiences in school are enriched by such events, and it would be nice to avoid mid-year layoffs altogether for these reasons alone. Yet there is another compelling reason to dread mid-year layoffs: They may undermine the quality of the teacher workforce, both immediately and going forward. The reasons have to do with which teachers are laid off and what signals the selection procedure sends to future teachers.

When a school district announces mid-year layoffs, there is little doubt about which teachers will get the axe. It’s an exercise in “last-hired, first-fired.” For instance, none of the 2,300 teachers that Los Angeles Unified School District anticipates laying off will have been in the district long enough to earn tenure—a coveted employment status almost entirely separated from serious notions of quality teaching. Mid-year layoffs can actually cut into the ranks of tenured teachers in districts with less turnover and fewer non-tenured teachers, but teachers’ contracts generally ensure that seniority, measured by length of service, is the chief criterion used in reducing staffing levels. In other words, teacher quality—in terms of the ability to foster learning—never enters the picture.

Since teacher quality is the most important school-based determinant of students’ academic progress, it’s important to consider how mid-year layoffs affect it. In the short run, it’s not terribly clear what the result is. On the one hand, teachers with only one or two years of experience tend to be less effective than their more experienced colleagues, so dismissing some part of the former group may actually improve the average level of skill of teachers in a district.

On the other hand, dismissing the least experienced teachers may have a negative effect on average teacher quality. Some of the most energetic and positive teachers are those with very little experience. For example, Teach for America corps members, who are carefully selected for academic skill and commitment to working in high-poverty schools, have been shown to be at least as effective as more experienced teachers. And what about teachers who are new to their current employer but have documented records of success elsewhere? They are just as vulnerable to being laid off as hapless rookies.

The immediate effects of mid-year layoffs on the overall quality of a district’s teaching force depends on the prevalence of particularly capable novices and highly effective veterans who lack tenure. But the result of layoffs depends on the remaining veterans’ ability to cope with larger classes even in schools where the teachers vulnerable to layoffs tend to be less effective.

Mid-year layoffs are most insidious and clear when we look further out. The way the layoffs are handled sends the signal that when push comes to shove, what really matters is seniority. These signals will make it harder for districts to attract the kind of teachers they will seek in the future—energetic, committed, and effective teachers who want to be rewarded for their hard work rather than the amount of time they have spent in a position. High-profile insults to the role of teacher quality in decisions about layoffs are most unfortunate as school districts strive to become strategic by aligning personnel practices and desired results.

It would clearly be ideal for school districts to have financial contingency reserves that would allow them to get through the year with the staffing pattern envisioned in September. This is a tall order in the short term, but a possible priority for states and districts once this recession has ended. Districts and states can do everything in their power in the short term to ensure that the least effective teachers are the ones let go. Despite being saddled with personnel systems driven by tenure policies and seniority, there have to be some ways to maintain a high-quality teaching staff even during mid-year layoffs. For example, early retirement incentives may be a ticket to keeping energetic, effective teachers with low-seniority in the classroom.

What’s more, there are now mountains of student achievement data linked to teachers—something that didn’t exist during the last epidemic of mid-year layoffs in the early 1990s. Efforts to bring this data to bear on questions about teacher quality should be redoubled, especially when sorting out which teachers are chronically ineffective teachers.

Mid-year layoffs highlight the inadequacies of the current human resource systems for teachers and the need to strengthen the teacher tenure process. Districts should work to ensure that only effective teachers get tenure. When layoffs are necessary and tenured teachers are protected, at least then we would know that the teachers who are retained have met a meaningful standard of effectiveness. Mid-year teacher layoffs are never a good thing, but they do remind us of inadequacies in our teacher policies and create some urgency for reform. Hopefully states and districts will use the current crisis as an impetus to revisit tenure policies to ensure that all students have access to effective teachers.

More on teacher quality:

• Report: Teacher Turnover, Tenure Policies, and the Distribution of Teacher Quality by Raegen Miller and Robin Chait
• Event: Addressing the Teacher Quality Gap
• Column: Policy Matters: Solving the Teacher Quality Dilemma by Robin Chait

STATE BUDGET WOES COULD LEAD TO SHORTER SCHOOL YEAR

January 12, 2009 12:37 PM ET | Eddy Ramírez

Facing a massive budget deficit, California is considering shortening the school year by five days, a move that would save the state $1.1 billion. But the proposal is causing uproar among families and educators, who say the consequences would be disastrous, the Los Angeles Times reports. State schools Superintendent Jack O'Connell told the paper the move would hurt low-income and minority children because affluent school districts will most likely have the funds to remain open all 180 days of the school year. If the California legislature agrees to cut the school calendar, the state will join North Dakota, Kentucky, and a few other states that require the least number of school days.

Much of the criticism is being directed at Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who proposed the idea. It bears noting that the governor sends his children to private school. His office says the idea to shorten the school year has received support from school districts that don't want to resort to more painful measures such as employee layoffs and cuts to arts and music programs. But school districts that are facing severe shortfalls in the state say it's not an either-or scenario. The Los Angeles Unified School District, for example, recently announced it is examining the possibility of laying off 2,300 instructors in an attempt to close a $400 million deficit in next year's budget.

American students already spend far less time in school than children in countries such as China and India. Shortening the school week, by even five days, critics say, would undermine efforts by educators to make American teenagers more competitive. Last year, U.S. News wrote about a film titled "Two Million Minutes" that raises concerns about U.S. public education and whether American students spend enough time in school. Tell us what you think. Should states facing budget woes shorten the school year? Is it better than eliminating arts and music programs?

SCHOOL GAINS ARE PUT AT RISK

Mockler: “The budget bell is ringing for California's schools to take a recessionary recess from reform.”

George Skelton, Capitol Journal | LA Times

January 12, 2009 -- From Sacramento -- It's inevitable that California public schools soon will be whacked with hefty program cuts. And that's a shame because students recently have been making significant gains.

A decade of academic advancement due to class-size reduction, tougher curriculum, higher standards, testing, accountability and other reforms could be stalled -- even reversed -- by the necessity to cut spending.

But there's no way around it. When the state's general fund is projected to be nearly $42 billion in the hole by the middle of next year and the cost of kindergarten-through-community college eats up roughly 40% of that fund, schools must take a hit, even after the probable tax increases.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has proposed shorting schools $2.1 billion during the rest of this academic year and $3.1 billion the next. Perhaps most eye-opening, he'd save the state $1.1 billion by cutting off money for one week's worth of instruction. The number of school days would be reduced to 175 from 180.

"It's a loss of learning opportunities," notes state Supt. Of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell. "Only eight states have fewer than 180 days."

Among other cuts, Schwarzenegger has proposed saving $114 million by eliminating a special program to bolster learning in "low-performing" schools. Democrats have suggested the same thing.

Also in jeopardy are class-size reduction, advanced placement programs for the university-bound, extra help for English learners, special ed, summer school, counseling, gifted programs, arts and music and a long list of other "categorical" programs that local districts would be free to cannibalize to make ends meet.

"If we were a baseball team, we'd be playing with seven players to the other team's nine and still be expected to beat them," says veteran education consultant John Mockler, referring to California's challenge in educating the most diverse school population in the nation -- 25% are English learners -- on relatively sparse rations.

A new report by Education Week, a national publication, ranks California 47th among the states in per-pupil spending, "adjusted for regional cost differences."

Mockler says that 4.4% of Californians' personal income is spent on public schools. By comparison, it was 5.6% in 1972 when Ronald Reagan was governor. That 1.2% difference, he says, is the equivalent of $22 billion. "Bring back Ron, I say."

A bit about Mockler: He's not exactly a household name, except around the Capitol, where he is a legend. The pony-tailed ed guru has been at the center of most education policy debates as a legislative staffer, gubernatorial appointee or consultant for 44 years.

Only a handful of people truly understand the complexities of school finance. And nobody does better than Mockler because he wrote the law: Proposition 98. Sponsored by the California Teachers Assn. and approved by voters in 1988, Prop. 98 basically guarantees K-12 schools and community colleges 40% of the general fund.

But it's far from that simple. And Mockler, 67, has made a very good living explaining, manipulating and protecting Prop. 98. "It allowed me to send my two kids to college," he says, grinning.

"Schwarzenegger once came over to me and said, 'I think I understand. Every time I screw with Prop. 98, you get richer.' "

Mockler is currently on a crusade to prove that California is getting its money's worth on schools. He stopped me in a cross-walk to deliver his pitch.

"If you only read newspapers or listened to talk shows, you'd think high schools were places of violence and sloth and didn't do squat," he said. "The system's not perfect. But there's significant improvement.

"It's not true that the sky's falling."

He offered some testing data from the Department of Education covering the last five years:

• There has been a 31% gain in students of all grades who score "proficient" or "advanced" in reading. (In 2003, 35% did; by 2008 the figure was up to 46%.)
• For math, there has been a 23% gain (from 35% to 43%.)
• The figures are most dramatic for targeted groups that started at a lower base. Among Latinos, there was a 60% gain into the higher reading levels (from 20% of students to 32%.) For blacks, 50% tested higher (from 22% to 33%.) And for the "educationally [economically] disadvantaged" the rise was 60% (from 20% to 32%).
• These groups also showed significant gains in math testing: 43% higher for Latinos, 47% for blacks and 37% for educationally disadvantaged.
• And a lot more kids overall have been taking high-end math and science courses.

The actual "achievement gap" -- the difference between the higher scores of whites and Asians versus the lower results of blacks and Latinos -- has not narrowed much, although it did begin to budge last year. But a bigger percentage of blacks and Latinos are improving.

Mockler says it's likely the budget cuts will slow the gains, but not reverse them.

O'Connell isn't so sure. He fears that the cuts threaten "a major setback" in efforts to close the achievement gap. "More than 1.5 million English learners attend school in California. It's critical to our entire state's economic future that they succeed and are well prepared for the competitive global economy."

"We're making progress," he adds. "It's slow, it's hard, it's incremental. But we've been on the right track. Reducing the school year, in particular, would be a step backward."

Unfortunately, the budget bell is ringing for California's schools to take a recessionary recess from reform.

MORE BUDGET HYSTERIA

Editorial from the Los Angeles Newspaper Group

11 January -- There's one surefire way to tell that state leaders are wrangling over budgets in Sacramento: Education officials are shrieking about the end of the world in Los Angeles.

It happens every year.

If budgets are tight - and given Sacramento's propensity to create a budget crisis every two to three years, that's often - Los Angeles Unified School District officials will offer up a number of dire predictions for what might happen if they don't get enough money:

Zillions of kids crammed into dilapidated classrooms; students starving without subsidized meals; thousands of teachers taking to the unemployment lines.

It's easy to get cynical about this Chicken Little act. The predictions of woe never seem to materialize. Usually they just serve to rile up parents and, more importantly, the unions, who in turn lobby Sacramento, which ultimately comes through with less draconian cuts.

It's worth remembering that the LAUSD hasn't had widespread teacher layoffs in more than a decade.

That said, this year's state budget crisis is extreme even by Sacramento standards. The combination of a down economy and years without financial discipline has taken its fiscal toll, resulting in a $40billion deficit. And LAUSD officials report a $400million (or 3 percent) shortfall in their $12 billion budget.

So, predictably, they're conjuring up countless ways students may have to suffer: Kindergarten classes packed with 40 children; 45 million meals lost for poor students; no art classes; pink slips for hundreds of teachers.

But such extreme consequences, of course, are unacceptable.

This is a school district with a bureaucracy so massive that it just fired its superintendent - who was hired for his ability to manage complex organizations - because he couldn't get a handle on it. Poor David Brewer III could never even figure out how many superfluous bureaucrats he had, let alone what they were doing.

This is also a school district that, due to its perpetually problematic payroll system, continues to pay employees who have long ago left or even died. And it has an entire layer of mini districts that have never delivered on their promise of decentralization and only add to the bureaucratic fat.

All of which is to say, there's a lot of cutting to be done in administration before anyone should even think of slashing classroom resources. There are also many high-priced consultants who should get the ax before any teachers do.

The district could also save some money by stopping its passive-aggressive battle against charter schools. These campuses educate students better - and less expensively - than traditional public schools. The LAUSD should embrace charters instead of trying to make life miserable for them.

Cuts at the classroom level ought to be a last resort. It's unthinkable that even one needed teacher should be let go while even one needless bureaucrat hangs on to his job.

●●smf's 2¢:   Sometimes one suspects that the Daily News editorial board is writing for The Daily [Other] Planet.

First: The real surefire way to tell that state leaders are wrangling over the budget is to wake up in the morning: state leaders have been wrangling over this year’s budget since January of last year. They have wrangled and they have generated one budget 85 days late that unraveled before the red ink was dry – and another one the Governor vetoed. California has no budget seven months into the fiscal year. Without a budget California has a single digit credit rating, that digit is zero. If California were a corporation the Sixty Minutes expose would have led to federal indictments, perp walks, plea bargains and/or court dates by now. 

Second: The Daily News doesn’t dispute the $40billion state revenue shortfall or the $400 million LAUSD funding shortfall (on top of $500 million already cut this year) – but they miss that Sacramento controls the funding, not LAUSD. Sacramento promised more and is delivering less – how is that LAUSD’s doing? And most importantly, how is any of this the responsibility of the kids in the classrooms who are paying the price? Right now they don’t have paper and pencils; soon enough they won’t have their teachers.

Third: The Daily News beats the last years’ dead horse in the payroll debacle. 

Fourth: The Daily News says: “such extreme consequences, of course, are unacceptable.”  The unacceptable consequences are the consequences of inaction in Sacramento, not at Beaudry, in the principal's office or in the classroom. A hundred and twenty one  lawmakers - 80 assemblypeople, 40 senators and one governor - have not done their constitutionally mandated homework. Six million children have been left behind, seven hundred thousand of them in our school district.

• The governor has proposed shortening the school year by five days. Not just for the economic crisis …but forever.
• Categorical flexibility:
  • The governor proposes giving school districts ‘discretion’ on whether they wish to continue small class sizes in K-3 Or layoff teachers…or go bankrupt. (Laying off teachers actually may not be an option – teachers do have contracts!)
  • Arts & Music and Afterschool programs?  Programs for English Language Learners? Programs for children of poverty? P.E.? The school lunch program? Districts can choose which ones they want, it’s local control …while Sacramento cuts funding to them.
• smf’s Second Law of Political Dynamics: No one ever granted spending flexibility while increasing funding.
• The local discretionary flexibility will be the choice between those programs or keeping and paying teachers; when the crisis is over the discretion will be between reviving those programs or giving teachers raises.

Where is the Daily News on this? Are these extreme consequences acceptable?

SCHWARZENEGGER PROPOSES 5 FEWER SCHOOL DAYS: Faced with a massive budget deficit, the governor wants to stop state funding for a week of classes.

Educators criticize the plan as most harmful to poor students.

Mel Melcon / Los Angeles Times -- Kindergartners at a Long Beach school. California school districts could lose five days of state funding under a proposal from Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, but they could choose to stay open at their own expense.

By Seema Mehta | Los Angeles Times

January 8, 2009  -- A proposal by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to shorten the school year by five days is creating panic among educators across California, who say they barely have enough time to fit the state's academic standards into the existing 180-day calendar.
The idea to cut funding equivalent to five school days would save $1.1 billion at a time when California faces a massive budget deficit. But state Supt. of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell called the proposal "devastating."

Related Content

• 

  In California, it's the budget and the...

• Lawsuit seeking to block California Democrats' tax hikes is tossed out

• California may delay tax refunds amid budget impasse

• Schwarzenegger steps up release of budget plan

"It would particularly hurt our low-income students and students of color," he said, because affluent districts are more likely to be able to pay for the five days themselves while poorer districts will be forced to eliminate those teaching days. "The result would be a further widening of the achievement gap," he said.

If the Legislature approves the proposal, California would join Kentucky, North Dakota and a few other states that require the least number of school days.

Parents are worried that the quality of their children's education would suffer and some said that it was an economic issue for them as well -- with an additional week of child-care costs. "I'm a single parent. It's hard to make ends meet," said Tina Herrera, 41, a Long Beach resident whose 9-year-old son attends Holmes Elementary School. "One extra week of child care is hard on my wallet. And there are thousands more just like me."

Republican Ken Maddox, a former assemblyman who is a school board trustee in South Orange County, said that although he is sympathetic to the governor's predicament, the state's schools already are underfunded.

"The standards are getting higher and higher, which is great. It would be nice if the dollars going to schools would get higher and higher," he said. "Our children deserve the best education possible, not the shortest education possible."

A Schwarzenegger spokesman said the suggestion came last fall from district superintendents as a less painful cut than some others that they could be forced to make. Some districts, for example, are considering closing schools, laying off teachers, and eliminating sports and arts programs. The governor's office did not provide the names of any superintendents who support the five-day funding cut.

"We put this forward knowing we were heading into what is clearly the most challenging fiscal environment California has ever faced," said H.D. Palmer, spokesman for Schwarzenegger's finance department.

"When you have to put forward a budget that closes a gap of more than $41 billion, criticism is going to be implicit in any proposal, whether in the education area or in health and human services or on the revenue side.

"That's why, before we came out with this proposal, we wanted to engage the education community at the front end of the process to get their views on how we can try to . . . do the least amount of damage possible," he said.

Lobbyist Sandy Silberstein, who represents Riverside County's 23 school districts, noted that districts would not be required to eliminate days. She said the proposal -- along with another that allows restricted funds, such as those in textbook accounts, to be used more freely -- gives school districts greater leeway in deciding how to weather the economic storm.

"What we have said . . . is give us the longest menu of flexible options," she said. "That is the only way we will survive this."

The 2009-10 budget is far from finalized, and it is unknown whether the school-year proposal will survive negotiations in Sacramento. But education probably will face major cuts because it makes up about 40% of the state budget.

Currently, the state requires 175 days of school, although an annual fiscal incentive created in 1983 prompted most districts to provide 180 days of instruction.

Many other countries require far more. Indian and Chinese students spend more weeks in the classroom every year than their American counterparts.

Education advocates have been calling for more days in the American school calendar for decades, notably in "A Nation at Risk," a 1983 report that called on states to create a 200- to 220-day school year, as well as more instructional time in the day.

Research has consistently shown students, if engaged academically, benefit from more classroom time.

"You don't need a PhD to understand that the more days students work with teachers, the more they learn," said Bruce Fuller, a professor of education and public policy at UC Berkeley.

O'Connell's fear that districts serving more low-income students or minorities would bear the brunt of the cuts is true in Pasadena, where the district could not afford to pay for the five days, said Pasadena Unified School District Supt. Edwin Diaz.

"It's a huge step backward and is going in the opposite direction of what we need in this state to close the achievement gap and improve performance for all kids," he said. "We need more time with the kids."

In addition to ensuring that today's generation is prepared to compete in a global economy, educators and others said there is another, more immediate, benefit from requiring students to spend more time in school.

"When you cut days out of school, I guess the question is what are students going to be doing with that time?" asked Chad Heeter, the Indianapolis-based director and editor of "Two Million Minutes," a 2008 documentary that examined lives and study habits of high school seniors in the United States, India and China. "What [time in school] does community-wide is keep kids busy and occupied and out of trouble."

Educators also had a more practical concern: Though Sacramento can decide to cut funding for five days of school, each of the state's 1,054 school districts would be required to renegotiate contracts with unions representing teachers and other employees, including potential pay cuts.

Joe Farley, superintendent of the Anaheim Union High School District, said he renegotiated salaries when he headed a San Diego County district.

"It was extremely hard," he said. "It's something I would avoid doing again."

In the Los Angeles Unified School District, the state's largest, Supt. Ramon C. Cortines said that officials expect to cut $400 million in next year's budget but that they are hamstrung until legislators approve a budget plan. This week, the district sent layoff notices to 2,300 instructors because of an anticipated shortfall this school year. Cortines implored state leaders to act quickly.

"We cannot do anything until we know what the parameters are that we have to work within," he said. "That has to come from Sacramento."

 

more o’ th’ same…:

Governor, legislative leaders to talk budget
San Francisco Chronicle,  USA - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said Wednesday he will meet today with Democratic and Republican legislative leaders to restart budget negotiations, ...

State of gridlock
San Francisco Chronicle,  USA - If this dysfunction continues, and the state is unable to pay its bills starting next month, your state tax refund could be delayed, Gov. ...

The Great California Fiscal Earthquake
TIME - By Kristin Kloberdanz / Modesto Wednesday, Jan. 07, 2009 Nick Ut / AP As 2009 settles in, California isn't quite the golden state anymore. ...

The wrong people pay for Schwarzenegger's busted budget
Los Angeles Times, CA - The state's wealthiest residents would make out just fine under his plan to cut services, hike taxes. The Schwarzenegger administration, which was launched ...

Schwarzenegger to restart stalled budget talks
The Associated Press - SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said Wednesday that he'll restart stalled budget talks with legislative leaders in hopes of getting a ...

Schwarzenegger implores lawmakers to act — again
San Jose Mercury News,  USA - 14 hours ago
By Mike Zapler A day after he vetoed a budget proposal that would have filled nearly half of the state's gaping budget hole, the governor called for yet ...

Video: Governor Critical Of Democrats Over Budget
kcratv - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger criticized Democratic legislators on Wednesday regarding the budget, accusing them of failing to stand up to "special interests." Show video

Schwarzenegger says he'll restart budget talks
San Jose Mercury News,  USA - AP SACRAMENTO—Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger says he will restart stalled budget talks in hopes of getting an agreement to deal with California's projected $42 ...

In red, states seek tax hikes
Christian Science Monitor, MA - By Daniel B. Wood | Staff writer / January 7, 2009 edition President-elect Obama plans middle-class and business tax cuts to stimulate the economy, ...

Proposed cut in California school days alarms educators
Los Angeles Times, CA - Educators are alarmed over a proposal by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to lop five days off the school year, a cut that would save the state $1.1 billion. ...

California budget crisis deepens
Xinhua, China -LOS ANGELES, Jan. 7 (Xinhua) -- California's budget crisis has deepened as the latest round of budget negotiations between Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger ...

California budget battle now headed to courts
MSNBC -
The fight over raising taxes to tackle California's budget deficit is headed to the courts. Democrats in Sacramento sent Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger a ...

Schwarzenegger Blocks Tax Rises as California Cash Crunch Looms
Bloomberg - Jan 7, 2009
By Michael B. Marois Jan. 7 (Bloomberg) -- California moved closer to running out of cash and being unable to pay its bills after Governor Arnold ...

Governor rejects Dems' budget, as he promised
San Francisco Chronicle,  USA - Jan 7, 2009
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed Democratic lawmakers' $18 billion mid-year budget package on Tuesday after leaders of the Legislature sent it to him, ...

California may delay tax refunds amid budget impasse
Los Angeles Times, CA - Jan 7, 2009
With Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's veto of Democrats' $18-billion package of tax hikes and cuts, the state could begin issuing IOUs as soon as Feb. 1. ...

Gov. Schwarzenegger rejects latest budget proposal
The Associated Press - Jan 6, 2009
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed an $18 billion deficit-cutting package Tuesday that legislative Democrats characterized as the ...

California gov vetoes Democrats' budget plan
Reuters - Jan 6, 2009
By Jim Christie SAN FRANCISCO, Jan 6 (Reuters) - Republican California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has vetoed a budget plan pressed by Democrats who ...

As We See It: More gimmicks for state budget
San Jose Mercury News,  USA - Jan 6, 2009
That's because Democratic legislators have been working with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on a plan that would raise money to deal with a deficit that will ...

Anti-tax groups sue over Calif. budget package
BusinessWeek - Jan 6, 2009
By JUDY LIN Republican lawmakers and anti-tax groups on Tuesday sued to block an $18 billion Democratic budget package, claiming it included tax increases ...

Democrats send budget package to Schwarzenegger
San Francisco Chronicle,  USA - Jan 6, 2009
By JUDY LIN, AP Writer The California Legislature's Democratic leaders have sent Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger an $18 billion deficit-cutting package that he ...

Anti-tax groups file suit against California's tax plan
Xinhua, China - Jan 6, 2009
LOS ANGELES, Jan. 6 (Xinhua) -- Anti-tax groups in California Tuesday filed a lawsuit to block the state's budget plan that would increase taxes on gasoline ...

State budget deal could be on verge of collapse
San Jose Mercury News,  USA - Jan 6, 2009
By Mike Zapler SACRAMENTO — A Democratic gambit to generate billions in new tax revenue for the depleted state treasury was on the verge of collapse Tuesday ...

Anti-tax groups sue over Calif. budget package
San Francisco Chronicle,  USA - Jan 6, 2009
By JUDY LIN, AP Writer Republican lawmakers and anti-tax groups are suing to block an $18 billion Democratic budget package. They claim it included tax ...

Tax opponents sue to stop California budget plan
San Jose Mercury News,  USA - Jan 6, 2009
By Mike Zapler SACRAMENTO — Taxpayer groups and Republican lawmakers filed suit today against a yet-to-be-enacted Democratic plan to raise billions of new ...

SO SUE THEM/STATE O’ TH’ STATE DELAYED

The Sacramento Bee CapitolAlert |AM Alert: 6 Jan

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger still hasn't signed that majority-vote budget Democrats passed back in December, but GOP opponents are going to court today to block the budget plan anyway.

Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, said his organization, backed by GOP lawmakers, will be filing a lawsuit that argues the Democratic plan is illegal because it raises taxes without the necessary two-thirds vote.

"How can anyone with a straight face look at this package of bills and say it's not intended to raise revenue?" Coupal asks.

(Democrats admit they are raising revenue, but say they are only raising fees and swapping one equal tax for another, thus meeting the legal requirement for a majority vote.)

The whole argument, of course, is moot so long as Schwarzenegger refuses to sign the $18 billion package, as he has since it passed.

Negotiations continue, though the governor's office has indicated little progress has been made.

With that stalemate being, well, stale, other budget-balancing plans are popping up.

In his column today, Dan Walters outlines a plan to net the state some money through redevelopment agencies:

Under the deal now being weighed, the state would allow city redevelopment agencies to extend local redevelopment projects now scheduled to expire, without having to meet recently enacted reforms, including proving the existence of blight. In return, the redevelopment agencies would float bonds secured by property taxes on those extended projects and share the borrowed money with the state. In effect, the state would be borrowing against itself, because it now is on the hook for about $2 billion a year in reimbursements to schools for the property taxes that redevelopment agencies retain - a state burden that would decrease slowly were the older projects to expire. But the deal would effectively allow the state to recapture some school money up-front.

Meanwhile, if you're expecting the State of the State address this week (it's usually the first full week of the year), don't hold your breath.

The Schwarzenegger administration has scheduled the big speech on Jan. 15.

No official word on why, but Kevin Yamamura reports the "speculation is that the governor may want to broker a midyear budget deal before he speaks to his fellow Californians. Perhaps it's better to have reached a partial budget solution than to explain that things in Sacramento are completely fouled up."

CTA FILES SCHOOL FUNDING INITIATIVE: 1 Cent Sales Tax Increase Would Benefit K-12 Schools, Community Colleges

CTA Files School Funding Initiative to Protect Students, Schools from Deeper Budget Cuts and Ensure Future Funding

CTA PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Sandra Jackson at 916-801-4776, Becky Zoglman at 916-296-5271 or Dina Martin at 415-710-6794

full text of initiative | cta website

December 19, 2008  - BURLINGAME – As the ongoing state budget crisis forces billions of dollars in cuts to public education, the California Teachers Association today filed an initiative that would implement a one-cent sales tax to provide new, ongoing funding for public schools and colleges that cannot be cut, delayed or diverted by the governor or the Legislature.

“California’s budget process is broken and our students and schools are suffering the consequences,” said David A. Sanchez, president of the 340,000-member CTA. “More students are being squeezed into already overcrowded classrooms, more than 10,000 teachers and education support professionals have been layed off, while art, music, technical and vocational education programs are being eliminated. The future of an entire generation of students is at stake.”

Already ranking 46th in the nation in per-student funding, California schools and colleges have been cut by more than $3.5 billion in the past year and face another $4 billion in cuts under the budget plan approved Thursday by the Legislature. The Republican budget proposal would cut schools by $10 billion.

“School funding has been delayed for months on end while politicians fight over the state budget plan, and it’s clear that lawmakers are unable to reach agreement on raising the revenues needed to fund our schools. It’s time for stable and independent funding that cannot be cut by the Legislature or diverted for other uses,” continued Sanchez.

With strict accountability measures, the Public School Investment and Accountability Act would ensure that taxpayer money is directed toward student learning and focused in the classroom. The new $5 billion to $6 billion generated annually could be spent to reduce class sizes in all grades; provide adequate and up-to-date textbooks and materials; provide quality teacher training; hire additional counselors, librarians and critical education support staff; restore arts and career technical programs; and recruit and retain highly qualified teachers for every school. None of the money can be spent on administrative costs and any misuse of funds is punishable by law.

“One way to improve our economy is by providing businesses with a well-educated workforce. These budget cuts are forcing community colleges to turn away students who want to learn the skills needed to succeed in the workplace,” said Sanchez. “California must do better, our students deserve better, and our future depends on it.”

CTA filed the initiative in order to qualify for a possible special election in 2009. The State Council of Education, CTA’s top governing body comprised of more than 800 democratically elected educators from across the state, will determine how the initiative moves forward at its meeting in January.

Visit www.cta.org for additional information and to read the full text of the initiative.

###

The 340,000-member CTA is affiliated with the 3.2 million-member National Education Association.

 

FACT SHEET: The Public School Investment and Accountability Act

PURPOSE: California’s schools are in trouble. Because of the state budget crisis, education spending has been cut by billions of dollars. These cuts have left schools with overcrowded classrooms, out-of-date textbooks and too few teachers, counselors and other critical education staff. School funding has been delayed for months on end while politicians fight over the state budget, creating chaos for local districts and making planning nearly impossible.

Already ranking 46th in the nation in per-student funding, California’s schools and colleges have been cut by more than $3.5 billion in the past year, and face another $4 billion in cuts under the budget plan approved by the legislature Thursday. The Republican budget proposal would cut more than $10 billion from education. It is time for ongoing revenues to schools that cannot be cut, delayed, borrowed or diverted by the Legislature or governor.

California businesses need a well-educated workforce. Investing in our schools and providing that well-educated workforce is one way to improve our economy. We cannot afford to lose jobs to other states.

The Public School Investment and Accountability Act is a 1-cent sales tax that will generate new, ongoing resources to local school districts and community colleges. With strict accountability requirements, the Act requires independent audits to ensure funding is directed toward students’ learning and makes any misuse of funds punishable by law.

NEW REVENUE SOURCE: The Act creates a one-percent sales tax increase effective January 1, 2010. It generates $5 billion to $6 billion annually. These funds are independent of Proposition 98 funding. Eighty-nine percent of funds go to K-12 schools, and 11 percent to community colleges. Funds will be distributed to school districts based on student average daily attendance.

HOW NEW FUNDS CAN BE USED: The new funds are solely for instructional and student improvement purposes and can only be used for the following in K-12 schools:

• Reducing class sizes in all grades beyond levels provided under current state programs with the intent of lowering pupil-teacher ratios to no more than 20:1 for K-3 classrooms, and 25 students or less in grades 4-12.
• Providing all students the opportunity for essential programs like art, music, career technical and vocational education.
• Providing direct student services, including hiring additional school counselors, librarians and nurses.
• Providing instructional supplies and equipment, including computers and technology.
• Providing quality staff training that is designed and implemented by teachers and other educators, and creating shared planning time for teachers during the school day by grade or subject matter so teachers can work together to improve student learning.
• Creating safe and secure learning environments for students and staff.
• Increasing salaries to recruit and retain quality teachers and education support professionals. (This includes all certificated and classified staff, and college faculty.)
• No money generated by the Act can be used on school administrative costs.

Eleven percent of the funds goes to community colleges and can be spent on:

• Providing instructional supplies, equipment, material and services to improve campus conditions.
• Providing individual assessment and counseling to help design curriculum around each student.
• Faculty development training that improves instruction and effectiveness.
• Providing compensation for faculty and counseling staff.

STRICT ACCOUNTABILITY: California schools must become more efficient and transparent in spending taxpayer dollars. The Act:

• Prohibits the legislature and the governor from taking, cutting or diverting the funds away from education.
• Requires the state controller to provide for an annual, independent financial audit of the Public School Investment and Accountability Fund to ensure compliance with the Act.
• Requires local school districts to verify funds have been spent as required by the Act.
• Requires audit results to be summarized in an easily understandable form and posted for the public to review on the California Department of Education website as well as on local school district websites.
• Authorizes the California attorney general to seek civil or criminal penalties for any misuse of funds.

ARNOLD RUINS THE STATE; MEDIA LETS HIM GET AWAY WITH IT

• It was Arnold who gutted the Vehicle License Fee on his first day in office that gives us an annual budget hole of $5 billion (and growing).
• It was Arnold who campaigned in 2004 on paying off just one year’s budget deficit by passing a bond that we’re still paying for as debt service.
• And it’s the Republicans in the legislature – and their adamant refusal to ever vote for a single tax increase whatsoever in any way, shape or form – who have abused the two-thirds requirement to pass a state budget each and every year, driving us further and further into fiscal irresponsibility.

California’s one of the most liberal states – but in Sacramento, we get nothing but an Alabama budget.

by Paul Hogarth,  BEYONDCHRON.ORG | San Francisco Alternative online daily

2009-01-05 -- Since Beyond Chron left on vacation two weeks ago, the state is no closer to resolving its $40 billion budget crisis – after Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed the Democratic plan to plug $18 billion in the hole. Despite the very real threat that the state will soon run out of money, Arnold lamented their proposal’s lack of “economic stimulus.”

Specifically, he wants to gut labor and environmental protections for various highway projects – while the press gives him fawning coverage as a “green crusader.”

Arnold’s latest budget package (proposed on New Year’s Eve) would:

• steal mental health funds out of Prop 63,
• include even more education cuts than initially proposed
• and – as if recklessly borrowing money didn’t put us into this mess in the first place, borrow $5 billion off future anticipated revenues. 

The Governor announced this while vacationing in Idaho – but no one in the press bothered to care. Meanwhile, the SF Chronicle criticized State Assembly Speaker Karen Bass for being out of town during the budget standoff – although she was trying to get help from the feds.

It doesn’t take much to understand why Sacramento’s in its current budget mess. What’s truly infuriating, however, is that Schwarzenegger keeps getting fawning media coverage – while Democrats in the legislature who are trying to do something about it get nothing but grief.

It was Arnold who gutted the Vehicle License Fee on his first day in office that gives us an annual budget hole of $5 billion (and growing). It was Arnold who campaigned in 2004 on paying off just one year’s budget deficit by passing a bond that we’re still paying for as debt service. And it’s the Republicans in the legislature – and their adamant refusal to ever vote for a single tax increase whatsoever in any way, shape or form – who have abused the two-thirds requirement to pass a state budget each and every year, driving us further and further into fiscal irresponsibility. California’s one of the most liberal states – but in Sacramento, we get nothing but an Alabama budget.

No doubt the $18 billion budget package that Democrats in the state legislature pushed through last month was politically untested – and legally suspect. Because Republicans will never vote for any tax increase, their majority-vote proposal re-arranged current tax revenues (which is perfectly legal) – and replaced the state gas tax with a gasoline “fee” (which may or may not hold up in court.) But State Controller John Chiang announced that the state will have no money by February 1st, and get reduced to issuing IOU’s. At a time when no one else has a solution, give the Democrats credit for trying. Republicans in the legislature, of course, want the government to go bankrupt – but Arnold always claims to be a “moderate.”

But Schwarzenegger didn’t veto the budget package because the Democrats did an end-run around the two-thirds vote requirement. In fact, he says he’s just as upset with the Republicans as they are – and won’t even include them in budget negotiations anymore. Instead, he complained that the budget package didn’t include an “economic stimulus” – and then called on Democrats to capitulate to his demands. First, Arnold wants public works projects to be opened up to private contractors – which the Los Angeles Times noted yesterday could greatly help his cronies. Second, he wants to eliminate environmental review for eleven of the state’s highway projects.

The latter is particularly obnoxious, when you consider how the media praises Arnold as some kind of environmental champion. Newsweek recently put him on their front-page and called him a “green-crusader,” while we hear rumors that President-elect Obama could make Arnold his new Energy Czar. Assembly Speaker Karen Bass says that Democrats have agreed to 75% of what the Governor has asked for, and “every one of our constituencies have been offended by what we have [compromised on] so far. But at some point in time, if we have met you 75% of the way, if the economic stimulus proposals that you are putting forward will not address the fiscal crisis, then we have all year long to debate the 25% that are remaining of your proposals.”

On December 31st, Schwarzenegger’s staff introduced his own budget proposal that only further showed his contempt for the state’s fiscal health. His education plan includes no teacher salary increases, eliminates a program that gives subsidies to low-performing schools, and cuts five days out of the academic school year. Arnold would also slash mental health funding – replacing it with Proposition 63 money (although the voters in 2004 explicitly approved it as supplemental to existing programs.) What’s most offensive, however, is he wants the state to just borrow another $4.7 billion from Wall Street – in the hopes that the state can afford to pay it back in 2011. As Speaker Bass noted, “if we borrowed $4 billion, we would pay back hundreds of millions in interest.”

Unlike his Republican counterparts in the legislature, Arnold will support tax increases – but the regressive types like expanding the sales tax. And permanently reducing the tax credit that family members receive for their child or elder dependents. Nowhere did his proposal include an obvious solution: restoring the upper-income tax bracket to the level that Republican Governors Pete Wilson and Ronald Reagan agreed to when budget times were tough. Schwarzenegger would rather the state borrow more money and get even further and further into debt than ask the rich to sacrifice just a little bit – while the poor, the disabled, the elderly and the children continue to make do every year with less.

Schwarzenegger didn’t release the budget plan himself. He’s still on vacation in Idaho, leaving his staff in Sacramento to distribute it instead. But you didn’t hear the press accuse Arnold for being callous, as the state teeters dangerously close to insolvency. Last November, the Chronicle went out of its way to criticize Karen Bass because she “leaves town” during the “budget mess.” Bass wasn’t hitting the ski slopes of Idaho like Arnold; at that time, she was participating at a policy conference on mental health.

Another time, Bass went to Washington DC – as she met with the Obama transition team about a bailout package for California. Every state is suffering, and it’s obvious why a state official would want to meet with the President-elect about negotiating some kind of financial assistance. But California doesn’t need a federal bailout because the economy’s in the tank. California needs federal assistance to save us from irresponsible Republican fiscal policies. Which is the last thing we should expect from such a liberal state.