| | |

State Spending Cap Initiative: Is It for Real?

Related to the prior post is a second initiative – also one that was submitted in connection with GOP legislative negotiations with the governor – that would cap state expenditures based on a formula linked to inflation and population growth. As with the pension initiative, it is unclear whether there is funding to obtain the needed signatures.

This initiative in effect proposes to return to the Gann limit that was approved by voters in 1979 as the “son of Prop 13” that had been approved the year before. The Gann limit on state spending was largely gutted by Prop 98 of 1988, which provides funding to K-14 education, and a related later initiative. Under the new proposed initiative, the Gann limit would be lowered so that it would likely pinch as the economy recovered. From the UC perspective, therefore, the likelihood that economic recovery would provide aid to the UC budget would be reduced.

The text of the initiative is at http://ag.ca.gov/cms_attachments/initiatives/pdfs/i937_initiative_11-0006.pdf

The Legislative Analyst’s analysis of the new initiative is at http://www.lao.ca.gov/ballot/2011/110297.pdf

Below is an excerpt from that analysis:

Summary of Fiscal Effects

This measure would result in the following major fiscal effects:

* Revised spending limit likely would constrain state spending below levels that otherwise would have occurred. Also, over time the percentage of the state budget devoted to education expenses likely would increase, and the percentage devoted to most other areas likely would decrease. The measure would also likely increase the level of state resources going to the state reserves, payment of certain debts, infrastructure spending, and tax rebates.

* Possible reduction in the amount of new bond debt that could be sold to fund infrastructure projects, particularly in the short-term.

Similar Posts

  • Faculty call for pause on budget & network security changes at UCLA

    Over 250 UCLA faculty, including a large number of department chairs and center directors, have written Chancellor Block with a detailed critique of plans for administrative centralization. The letter follows earlier exchanges between department chairs and Executive Vice Chancellor/Provost Emily Carter and other top administrators. “Although we appreciated the fora that EVC/P Carter recently organized in response to an earlier letter requesting more time to evaluate the re-organization plans she is proposing, we continue to feel that there has been insufficient time or detail to evaluate their consequences and that we have not been adequately involved in the consultation process,”…

  • |

    Report: Affordable Public Higher Education is Possible Today

    A report this week from Reclaim California Higher Education (a coalition of faculty and student groups) makes the case that affordable (even free) higher education is within reach for California. The privatization experiment has failed. The harm to a generation of hard-working, high-aiming young people is proven. It’s time to return to what works: the proven Master Plan for higher education in California. California, with its own resources, can afford to restore top-quality, accessible, affordable college and university opportunity to every qualified student. In fact, Californians can afford nothing less. You can read a summary and download the entire report…

  • | |

    Jerry Brown Suggests Master Plan is Dated

    Our previous post covered the Jan. 22 meeting of the Regents’ Committee on Educational Policy.  As noted, there was discussion of the 1960 Master Plan for Higher Education, considered a major accomplishment of Brown’s father when he was governor. Below is a link to Brown’s comments in which he suggested the Plan was now dated.  [youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RmjI4gVync?feature=player_detailpage]

  • | | | | | | | | |

    Tradition!

    The Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) has issued a report on UC and CSU funding.  LAO is usually viewed as a neutral agency.  But it is a component of the legislature.  So it tends to favor approaches that add to legislative control as opposed to, say, gubernatorial control.  This report is no exception. LAO seems to want to return to what it terms the “traditional” approach to funding, but with bells and whistles added to monitor legislative goals.  The traditional approach seems to be one focused on undergraduate enrollment.  But in fact the tradition – such as it is – has…

  • |

    7 Wasn’t So Lucky

    The cash statement from the California state controller for the first seven months of fiscal year 2013-14 is out.  Revenues are up about 1% from last year at this time.  That gain is not very good.  However, it may be largely due to an aberration last fiscal year when there was a surge of personal income tax revenue in January 2013.  The surge seemed to have something to do with antics back then in Washington over fiscal cliffs, etc., which might have resulted in some tax changes (but didn’t).  The current DC crisis de jour is the debt ceiling, but…