News

School districts welcome Prop. 30

Passage of governor's tax will stop the bleeding, superintendents say

Superintendents from both Mountain View school districts are welcoming the passage of Proposition 30, even as they acknowledge that the new legislation won't change all that much when it comes to daily operations.

Proposition 30, which will help the state fund schools by combining a progressive income tax with overall increases to sales tax, among other provisions, doesn't mean more money will suddenly come flooding into the coffers of the Mountain View Whisman and Mountain View-Los Altos school districts. However, it will stop each of the districts from losing a significant amount of money on an annual basis, according to the superintendents.

"Prop. 30 does not give us any additional money," said Craig Goldman, Mountain View Whisman superintendent. "It keeps funding flat."

Under the new tax, which is scheduled to last six years, Goldman's district will hold onto $2.3 million annually, or about $457 per student per year.

It's nice that the distrct will be able to keep that money, Goldman said. But at the same time, he noted parents should not expect to see any new programs or class size reductions as a result. That's because California is still working to get its finances in order and the district needs to budget to plan for that.

Goldman said the district will continue along with its current budget, which had anticipated that Proposition 30 was not going to pass. By doing so, Goldman said the district will be better prepared for future cuts and won't have to dip so deeply into its reserves if the state continues to underfund schools -- which, he said, is a very real possibility.

Currently, the district is supposed to receive $6,700 per student per year from the state, but it only gets $5,200, Goldman said. Mountain View Whisman officials have worked hard to make their district work, despite being underfunded.

"At this point, we're pleased to be able to maintain what we have," Goldman said.

Officials at Mountain View-Los Altos said they are also pleased that Proposition 30 won voter approval.

"It is undoubtedly great news," said Joe White, superintendent of business services with the high school district. Unlike Mountain View Whisman, White's district did not anticipate Proposition 30 failing in its budget. Instead, White said, they set aside savings to deal with the potential loss of funding that would result if the proposition had been shot down. Still, even with that money set aside, White said, its failure would have been hard on the district, as it would have lost an additional $1.8 million annually, or $482 per student per year. That would have come on top of the $2.5 million in cuts the state already dropped on the district.

"Having to pay out another $1.8 million would have been a problem in the long term," White said, adding that the district would have only been able to sustain that for a few years without taking serious cost-cutting measures.

Comments

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Kicking the can down the road
a resident of Monta Loma
on Dec 3, 2012 at 6:15 pm

This will solve nothing, except for pushing the problem till a further date. This will probably not even be enough to pay the teacher pensions. Until the problems are solved, this will do nothing, except take more money from tax payers.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Sabrina
a resident of The Crossings
on Dec 3, 2012 at 9:38 pm

Re: California tax reform

Taxpayers are what has always funded public education, notably before the passage of Prop 13 in 1978 (and the ensuing nationwide tax revolt).

Taking more money from taxpayers is exactly what we need, however, we must be taxing those most able to pay (i.e. the wealthiest Californians and the wealthiest Californian corporations), not those who are already struggling.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Ryan
a resident of Whisman Station
on Dec 4, 2012 at 10:31 am

> Taking more money from taxpayers is exactly what we need, however,
> we must be taxing those most able to pay (i.e. the wealthiest
> Californians and the wealthiest Californian corporations), not those > who are already struggling.

This is the type of confused reasoning that has caused this state to reach the edge of fiscal collapse.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by steve
a resident of Old Mountain View
on Dec 5, 2012 at 3:18 pm

@Sabrina Let me ask you this: Don't you at some point think that these "Wealthy" Californians will at some point get sick and tired of being taxed and vilified and will finally leave? Then what?

On the bright side we are now officially a one party state. No more pesky annoying viewpoints that we don't agree with. I for one breath a great sigh of relief.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Mixx, Scott's Seafood replacement, opens in Mountain View
By Elena Kadvany | 4 comments | 2,353 views

Ten Steps to Get Started with Financial Aid
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 3 comments | 1,665 views

All Parking Permits Should Have a Fee
By Steve Levy | 21 comments | 1,497 views

For the Love of Pie
By Laura Stec | 5 comments | 1,360 views

Repeating and “You” Sentences
By Chandrama Anderson | 4 comments | 908 views