Proposition 92: pro and con

By Cynthia Lee

On Feb. 5, California voters will decide on a measure that would reduce student fees in the state's community college system, limit future fee increases and implement a new state requirement to fund the "largest higher education system in the world," according to Proposition 92's community college supporters.

Proposition 92 is coming at a difficult time, when cash-strapped California is facing a $14.5-billion deficit. The UC regents (See "Regents mull cuts to budget") and CSU trustees are currently considering such painful options as higher student fee increases, enrollment caps and program cuts.

Those who oppose Proposition 92 — including the UC Board of Regents — say it would further erode UC's state-funded budget. At the same time that it would limit fee increases to community college students, it would increase pressure to raise fees at UC and CSU, opponents charge.

If it passes, the proposition would leave the state with less general fund money, said Assistant Vice Chancellor Keith Parker, the head of UCLA Government and Community Relations. These discretionary funds support UC, CSU, prisons, health and human services and other programs not protected by state mandates. Parker noted that UC's share of the state general fund has already slipped from 7% in 1970 to a little more than 3% today.

"I believe too much of the state budget is already allocated due to entitlements," Parker said. "By locking down more funding, you not only put the governor and the legislature in a tough position, but you also let them off the hook at the same time. It's their responsibility to figure out how best to allocate state funds and to address the needs of California. The entitlement funding formulas leave less than 15% of the overall budget on the table for the governor and the legislature to make decisions on which of California’s short- and long-term needs to address."

In 1988, voters passed Proposition 98, a funding mandate that sets aside roughly 40% of state general fund revenue for K-14, with the bulk of the money going to K-12.

Proposition 92 would establish a separate guarantee based on a formula earmarking Proposition 98 funds for the community colleges. The state would be required to allocate more money — an average of $300 million per year from 2007-08 through 2009-10 — than required currently to K-14 education, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

In defending Proposition 92, co-author Scott Lay, CEO of the Community College League of California, said the UC/CSU compacts would actually cost the state more general fund money over the next three years than would Proposition 92 for the community colleges.

"I have a real problem with people who have criticized us after they have locked up their part of the budget," said Lay. "We are the largest higher education system in the world, serve the most economically disadvantaged students, but then get criticized when we fight for the same budget stability other segments have."

Added Parker: "The compact is not written in stone. Each year, the compact agreements still have to be negotiated with the governor and the legislature. Proposition 92 would establish an entitlement funding formula that is set."

See who else is in favor of Proposition 92 and why they endorse it.

See who is opposing it and why.