Staff
- Sara Cortez
-
(916) 319-8348
Special Education, Preschool, Child Nutrition, and Facilities - Kenneth Kapphahn
-
(916) 319-8339
Proposition 98, School District Budgets, School Transportation - Lisa Qing
-
(916) 319-8306
California Community Colleges - Michael Alferes
-
(916) 319-8338
Local Control Funding Formula, Charter Schools, Alternative Schools, High School Career Technical Education - Ian Klein
-
(916) 319-8336
University of California; College of the Law, San Francisco; California State Library - Natalie Gonzalez
-
(916) 319-8320
California State University, Student Financial Aid - Dylan Hawksworth-Lutzow
-
(916) 319-8308
Child Care, Expanded Learning, Teachers, and Education Technology - Edgar Cabral
-
(916) 319-8343
Deputy Legislative Analyst: K-12 Education - Jennifer Pacella
-
(916) 319-8332
Deputy Legislative Analyst: Higher Education
Publications
Education
To browse all LAO publications, visit our Publications page.
Child Care Reforms Merit Serious Consideration
February 24, 2005 - The Governor proposes a number of significant reforms to California’s subsidized child care system including eligibility restrictions, a new waiting list system, and tiered reimbursement rates. With certain qualifications, we support proposed eligibility and waiting list changes. Although tying reimbursement rates to quality makes sense, the Legislature may wish to consider alternative approaches which increase reimbursement rates for higher quality care rather than simply reducing reimbursement rates (as the Governor proposes) for lower quality care.
Proposition 49—Recommend Repeal
February 24, 2005 - We recommend the Legislature enact legislation placing before the voters a repeal of Proposition 49 because (1) it triggers an autopilot augmentation even though the state is facing a structural budget gap of billions of dollars, (2) the additional spending on after school programs is a lower budget priority than protecting districts’ base education program, and (3) existing state and federal after school funds are going unused.
Charter Schools
February 24, 2005 - Ever since it was first implemented in 1999-00, we have had concerns with the calculation of the charter school categorical block grant funding level. We recommend the Legislature pursue a reform strategy based upon a new control section in the annual budget act that would provide charter schools a share of categorical funding that is equivalent to the proportion of K-12 students they serve. This alternative approach would be simple, workable, and consistent with the original intent of the block grant.
School District Financial Condition
February 24, 2005 - Some school districts face huge fiscal liabilities to pay for retiree health benefits. It will be difficult for districts to deal with these obligations without a long-term strategy. We recommend the Legislature take various actions to start addressing this problem. Around 40 percent of school districts face declining enrollment. The state continues to have inequities in revenue limit (general purpose) funding across school districts. We recommend an approach to address both of the problems, allowing declining enrollment districts to increase their per pupil revenue limit until they reach the equalization target.
Governor's Vocational Education Reform
February 24, 2005 - The 2005-06 budget proposes $20 million in support of a broad-based reform of vocational education in K-12 education. We believe the Governor's proposal addresses a significant problem, but lacks the level of detail necessary for the Legislature to fully evaluate it. We therefore recommend the Legislature direct the Department of Finance to provide to the budget subcommittees prior to budget hearings (1) the details of the proposed plan and (2) responses to our initial concerns about the proposal.
Proposition 98 Budget Priorities
February 24, 2005 - The budget proposes to leave 2004-05 Proposition 98 appropriations at roughly the level provided in the 2004-05 Budget Act. This proposal would create $2.3 billion in General Fund savings over the two years. While the Governor’s 2005-06 spending plan for K-14 grows by $2.9 billion, it does not include funding to cover all K-14 operating expenses that districts would incur under the budget proposal. We recommend the Legislature build a base budget for 2005-06 that fully funds the current K-14 education program.
Cost Shift to Teacher Retirement Costs Raises Short-Term and Long-Term Issues
February 24, 2005 - The Governor proposes shifting $469 million in General Fund teacher retirement costs to school districts and/or schools. Due to current law requirements, it is likely that the proposal would require a $469 million upward “rebenching” of Proposition 98’s minimum guarantee—nullifying the proposed General Fund savings. In addition, from a long-term perspective, the proposal on its own would not address the retirement system’s shortcomings—the lack of local control and responsibility.
Student Fees
February 24, 2005 - We describe the fee increased proposed for the state's public universities in the Governor's 2005-06 budget. We raise concerns with how revenue from these fee increases would be treated in the proposed budget. We also recommend that the Legislature adopt a fee policy that pegs the fees students pay to a fixed share of their educational costs.
Marginal Cost Formula
February 24, 2005 - We describe the state's marginal cost methodology, which is used to calculate the funding required to pay for each additional student that attends the state's public universities. We also recommend that the Legislature revisit the marginal cost formula to better reflect actual costs.
Governor Proposes to Put Universities' Budgets on "Autopilot"
February 24, 2005 - In spring 2004 the Governor developed a "compact" with the University of California and the California State University that specifies funding targets through 2010-11. We describe the compact and its fiscal implications. We also recommend that the Legislature disregard the compact and instead continue to use the annual budget process as a mechanism to fund its priorities and to hold the segments accountable for fulfilling the mission assigned to them by the Master Plan for Higher Education.