Originally Posted By Darkbeer <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/05/20/MNRM17NEL2.DTL" target="_blank">http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/...NEL2.DTL</a> >>But voters showed at the ballot box Tuesday just how unhappy they are with business as usual in Sacramento. A reprise of last year's budget fight could cripple the state financially and leave voters even angrier, said Barbara O'Connor, a professor of political communications at Sacramento State University. "There's no alternative but to get legislators to look past personal politics," she said. "California's budget is an interim disaster and a long-term problem. We need to first fix the disaster and then try and decide what to do down the road."<<
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "Come on, Class size 50 and over... NO WAY... Will they go up around 10%, yes, but still will remain in the 30's! Repair your own sidewalk... Come On, what a bunch of BS DMV having less hours... No problem there, just expand alternative options, such as using the web, mail, and places like AAA offices. And no trash pickup... Come on, Most communities already charge a fee for trash pickup, and it is NOT part of the expenses paid for by State/Local Taxes...." Get in touch with reality. Fast. The no new tax idiots are killling this state. Class size? With billions upon billions upon billions in budget cuts coming up, 30 will be a dream in many areas. Sidewalk repair? If you ever own a home, get back to us about telling people to do it themselves. AND about the insurance costs for any liability done for work you paid for on what currently is a public walkway and government property. DMV? The cuts could run deep. AAA, the web, etc will become overworked and overloaded. You'll wait just as long there, if not longer, due the resultant overflow. But no one ever mentions THAT. As for trash, your statement made no sense. Schawarzenegger will be robbing billions from local government to make his ends meet, and the result will be local governments will either have to charge far more for things such as trash pick up and/or cut back those services severely. Long Beach, for example, is already looking into way for citizens to transport certain types of their own trash to dumps. Public doesn't know that, but I do. My examples are just selected highlights. Unless the legislature passes taxes disguised as fees and gets away with it, which still won't address the entire gap, and I'll go back to my pet issue of the idea that the state can lay off every single damn employee under its control (239,000) and it still won't cover half the problem, and all you no new taxes people can continue to live in a dream world. Plus, Prop 13 needs to go.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder <a href="http://www.laobserved.com/biz/2009/05/la_chamber_on_state.php" target="_blank">http://www.laobserved.com/biz/...tate.php</a> This link is indicative of every single analysis I've seen since last night. Kids and schools and the poor get poorer.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Repair your own sidewalk... Come On, what a bunch of BS<< True. It likely won't be repaired at all. The fantasy of the no new taxes zealots is that these things will just somehow repair themselves. But maybe KFC will fix cracked sidewalks if they're allowed to paint their logo over the repair.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder More crap. <a href="http://www.sacbee.com/topstories/story/1877914.html" target="_blank">http://www.sacbee.com/topstori...914.html</a>
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder <a href="http://www.rand.org/publications/randreview/issues/spring2005/ulttest.html" target="_blank">http://www.rand.org/publicatio...est.html</a> This is a 2005 Rand analysis of California's education system, which includes this snippet(If he always does it, so can I once): "In 1978, California voters passed Proposition 13, which limited property tax rates to 1 percent and capped annual increases in property taxes. In response, the California legislature passed Assembly Bill 8, under which the state took control of school district funding. In the following academic year, the percentage of school district funding coming from the state government ballooned from 32 percent to 62 percent. In 1979–1980, the state’s portion swelled to 71 percent. The state equalized resources across school districts so that students in poorer districts were at less of a disadvantage in terms of spending per pupil than they had been before. However, this reform also appears to have contributed to lower overall levels of spending statewide. Prior to 1978, local voters had decided at the ballot box how much to tax themselves for local schools. But when the resources started to become equalized across districts statewide, local voters lost some of their incentive to spend so much on schools, thus precipitating a substantial decline in statewide school spending relative to that in other states. The decline in spending likely led to larger class sizes and, perhaps, to lower achievement levels for students in California compared with those across the nation. Indeed, Proposition 13 marked a dramatic turning point in funding for K–12 public education in California. Revenues and expenditures per pupil had grown fairly rapidly both in California and nationwide until the early 1980s. But California fell well behind the nation by the late 1980s. Despite recent funding increases for K–12 education, California schools have continued to spend far below the national average. Measured in year 2000 dollars, spending per pupil in California went from more than $600 above the national average in 1978 to more than $600 below the national average in 2000. Proposition 98, passed by California voters in 1988, did not help much. Despite its good intentions (of guaranteeing to public schools a minimum percentage of the state’s budget), Proposition 98 practically institutionalized the bad habit of subjecting school finances to the extreme fluctuations in the state’s economy. More than a third of state funding under Proposition 98 has also been earmarked for specific local purposes, further limiting local discretion."
Originally Posted By velo K2M - we had to turn down the KFC offer because of the hooha it caused in town. I thought it was kind of funny and didn't really mind (altho the $$ would have only fixed about 3 short-term - out of the millions we have). But the "uproar" was too much for the Mayor, so she backed out.
Originally Posted By velo Aaand, our school district announced today that there will no longer be summer school. Our summer school was remedial and in place to make sure that struggling (or behind) seniors, and those with disabilities, could graduate on time -if at all. They have yet to come up with a good solution (perhaps adult ed) and it's clear to me that we are really going to have a problem on our hands a few years down the line..
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder Moron, er, more on Prop 13. I agree with this article. <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/04/12/INB1VU48J.DTL" target="_blank">http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/...U48J.DTL</a> "Prop. 13 - approved by voters in 1978 - and subsequent tax-limit measures have made responsible fiscal planning impossible at the state level. By shrinking revenue from property taxes, Prop. 13 has distorted local government financing and land-use planning. Instead, local governments must rely on sales tax-generating shopping malls and housing sprawl tied to developer fees. Meanwhile, the state, which had helped cash-strapped local governments and school districts deal with Prop. 13, now faces its own fiscal crisis." snip "Haven't we had enough of this nonsense? Isn't it time we took the first few steps toward fiscal sanity? We can preserve Prop. 13's safeguards for homeowners, while returning to the practice of periodically reassessing commercial properties. This would add an estimated $4 billion to $5 billion to the state's coffers. We should revise fiscally irresponsible laws that allow tax loopholes to be created by a majority vote of the Legislature, but require a two-thirds vote to eliminate them." snip "The reform of Prop. 13 would have great symbolic importance. It was the first blow by those who wanted to minimize government, who regarded all taxes as "felony grand theft," to quote the late Howard Jarvis, who led the Prop. 13 campaign. Thirty years later, that attitude is handicapping not only government but also our economic future - ominously, California's schoolchildren are already well behind their counterparts in Pacific Rim countries in math and science proficiency."
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder So again, these are solutions for fixing the budget crisis once and for all. What say the no new tax people besides CUT CUT CUT?
Originally Posted By velo >>ominously, California's schoolchildren are already well behind their counterparts in Pacific Rim countries in math and science proficiency."<< honestly, I sometimes think we're behind a lot of the U.S. as well. But I am tired of the comparison to the Pacific Rim countries; their challenges nowhere mirror ours, educationally-speaking.
Originally Posted By Darkbeer <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-election21-2009may21,0,5981017.story" target="_blank">http://www.latimes.com/news/lo...17.story</a> >>Schwarzenegger said he received the voters' message "loud and clear: an overwhelming majority of people told Sacramento, 'Go and do your work yourself, don't come to us with your problems...." "The message was clear from the people, go all out and make those cuts and live within your means," he said.<< >>
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>So again, these are solutions for fixing the budget crisis once and for all. What say the no new tax people besides CUT CUT CUT?<< The Governor answered that one rather spot-on, I thought. >>Schwarzenegger said the state will make "drastic cuts" and predicted it will be very difficult because most voters, when asked about specific reductions, oppose cutting education, health care for the most vulnerable and law enforcement. "People don't know themselves where they want the cuts," he said. "They just say, 'Make cuts and you figure it out.' "<< Th truth is, people say they want no new taxes, government is too big, too wasteful. Then the cuts start coming, and services they care about (police, education -- very visible stuff) gets hit and the shrieking starts. Where do people think this has to hit, some secret hidden government program that doesn't affect anyone? No, it means hitting schools, hitting police and fire, hitting everything. It's going to be very, very painful. Eventually, everyone will feel it.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "The message was clear from the people, go all out and make those cuts and live within your means," he said.<< Darkbeer, you cited this, do you have any idea what it means? Like K2M says in post 74, these cuts will be drastic. Where do you propose they start?
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Since he isn't a teacher, then increasing class size by 10% sounds like no big deal. It means less one-on-one time for the students who need it most, but oh well. Doesn't impact him directly, tough noogies for the teachers. Then, after they been eviscerated, later we can read about how public schools are failing our kids, and private schools are superior. Of course, those private schools largely succeed by -- ta da! -- limiting class size and by being well-funded (not to mention jettisoning kids who don't measure up, something public schools can't do).
Originally Posted By Darkbeer Let's see, bring School vouchers to California. Say a voucher worth 2/3'rd of the current cost for a child to attend public school. Cut back on eligibility requirements for many free/low cost programs. Do more checking/investigations on those claiming free government money and/or services to make sure the truly needy get it, but not those playing the system. Cut back on government regulations and overhead. Cut back hours on many government services, such as only being open 3 or 4 days a week, but make one of them "alternative" hours, such as Noon to 8 PM instead of 9 to 5. One of the few places I don't want hours being cut would be public libraries. (If they are already closed one or two days a week). Cut Legislature pay 10% (looks like this will happen). Cut their staff and approved reimbursements by 20%. Reduce the amount of panels and oversight committees (Many can be combined, this is also being planned). Heck, make the private, such as the Tax Preparers Certification. Let them pay for their own costs. (Tax Preparers used to have to get a state license). <a href="http://www.ctec.org/" target="_blank">http://www.ctec.org/</a> Outsource as much as possible, reducing costs. Basically, shrink the size of Government. Also, bring back Oil Drilling off-shore. Current Oil drilling is amazing safe and effective. (But require they be at least a few miles off the coastline). Helps reduce dependency on foreign oil, and would bring in a lot of revenue, similar to Alaska and Texas, two states that have no budget problems. Increase some fees, such as overnight camping sites at State Parks and Beaches to better reflect costs, and make them closer to cost of other options.
Originally Posted By Darkbeer As for the DMV cuts.... How often does some need to go to the DMV... once every 5 to 10 years... And how often does someone need to go see a doctor, how many times a year? What does an employee do when they need to see the Doctor, make an appointment and then arrange with their employer to take some time off. Do the same with the DMV. They offer appointments, and then make an arrangement with your employer to go to the DMV.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder THAT'S a $21 billion savings? Even if we knew what a generic "cut" means, do you know how much these "cuts" would save? How much does "do more checking" cost? Does that balance out a "cut"? And outsourcing? Outsourcing what? You can't say "as much as possible" becasue you don't know what that means. Your post was mostly platitudes, and a link to a tax site that said nothing.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "As for the DMV cuts.... How often does some need to go to the DMV... once every 5 to 10 years... And how often does someone need to go see a doctor, how many times a year? What does an employee do when they need to see the Doctor, make an appointment and then arrange with their employer to take some time off. Do the same with the DMV. They offer appointments, and then make an arrangement with your employer to go to the DMV." Do you think these things through before you post? Your assumptions are false, my non-friend.
