^[PDF] The California Deficit Prevention Act (version 2)

Twenty-five percent could be used for local school or highway construction projects. Any remaining funds would go to the Sales Tax Rebate Account. Moneys in this account would accumulate until there were sufficient amounts to allow for the reduction of the state sales tax rate by at least one-quarter cent for a 12-month period.
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2005/050037.pdf

2005 Initiative Analysis: The California Deficit Prevention Act (version 3)

At the state level, revenues are defined as “excess” if they exceed the appropriations limit over a two-year period. Such revenues are then divided equally between taxpayer rebate s and onetime appropriations to K-14 schools.
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2005/050038.htm

2005 Initiative Analysis: The California Deficit Prevention Act (version 4)

As a general indi cation, over the past 25 years, the current-law Test 2 cost-of-living factor increased about 1.2  percent per year more than the proposed Test 2 cost-of-living factor. Other Provisions.
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2005/050039.htm

^[PDF] The California Deficit Prevention Act (version 4)

Thus, over time, the long-term school funding guarantee grows at a rate which is roughly similar to the appropriations limit. Test 3 and Maintenance Factor. K-14 funding can be reduced below the level required by Test 2 when either (1) the guarantee is suspended through a two-thirds vote of the Legislature or (2) an alternative funding formula becomes operative during low- revenue years (“Test 3”).
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2005/050039.pdf

2005 Initiative Analysis: The California Deficit Prevention Act (version 5)

At the state level, revenues are defined as “excess” if they exceed the appropriations limit over a two-year period. Such revenues are then divided equally between taxpayer rebate s and onetime appropriations to K-14 schools.
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2005/050040.htm

2005 Initiative Analysis: Redistricting Reform: The Voter Empowerment Act

House of Representatives districts every ten years, following the federal census. This process is known as “redistricting.” The primary purpose of redistricting is to establish di stricts which are “reasonably equal” in population.
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2005/050048.htm

2005 Initiative Analysis: More Money for the Kids Act

Proposal The proposed initiative requires school districts to spend at least 75  percent of operating funds on direct classroom instruction beginning in the first full school year following enactment of the measure.
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2005/050049.htm

^[PDF] More Money for the Kids Act

Proposal The proposed initiative requires school districts to spend at least 75 percent of operating funds on direct classroom instruction beginning in the first full school year following enactment of the measure.
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2005/050049.pdf

2005 Initiative Analysis: Fairness for Public Charter Schools Act

After the initial five-year charter review period, this initiative allows authorizers to extend subsequent renewal cycles up to 15  years. Funds Certain Charter School Facility Costs. The initiative requires the annual budget act to include funding for no less than 80  percent of the annual state lease costs for certain charter schools.
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2005/050050.htm

2005 Initiative Analysis: Put the Kids First Act

Proposal This initiative makes two changes to existing state law: Extends Probationary Period to Five Years. The initiative designates certificated employees as permanent after five school years in a certificated position.
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2005/050051.htm