 |
 |
Gov. Jerry Brown outlines his revised budget Monday (AP Photo)
By GUY KOVNER
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
Public schools got a $3 billion boost from Gov. Jerry Brown on Monday, but Sonoma County educators remained cautious about their budget prospects.
Human services officials also pointed to benefits and takeaways for children in the governor’s revised $88.8 billion spending plan for the fiscal year beginning July 1.
“It’s a mixed bag,” said Steve Herrington, Sonoma County schools superintendent.
Put simply, the $3 billion is payback for about one-fourth of the $13 billion in school payments deferred by the state since 2007, Herrington said.
The remaining $10 billion owed to schools, he said, hinges on whether state lawmakers — and ultimately voters — approve tax extensions which the governor said are essential to his budget plans.
Without the tax extensions, deeper school budget cuts will be necessary, Herrington said.
Chris Heller, principal of Analy High School in Sebastopol, said he was hopeful the additional funding would rescind layoffs at his school.
Six Analy teachers have been notified of reduced work hours, he said. But Heller is not sure exactly how the budget would impact local schools, especially given the uncertain fate of the tax extensions.
“I am just happy it’s not another cut,” Heller said.
Carey Wheaton, a member of a group called Save Our Schools 2011, said the grassroots lobbying effort would continue.
“At this point, the immediate goal is still getting the word out to every student, teacher and parent and caring citizen to call, write and email Sacramento in favor of increased funding for education,” she said.
West County parents, teachers and students formed the group this spring in part over concerns that Analy and El Molino high schools could be forced to go from a seven-period day to a six-period day in 2012-13.
A seven-period day gives students a chance to take an extra elective, which many use for music programs, art, language and industrial arts opportunities.
Members have been passing out fliers at end-of-year school functions, started a Facebook page and created a website, saveourschools2011.net.
For Santa Rosa Junior College, the governor’s budget — known as the “May revise” — is “good news with an asterisk,” said Doug Roberts, vice president of business services at Santa Rosa Junior College.
SRJC had feared losing up to $16 million, and Brown’s proposal made that bleak outlook less likely, although college officials are still bracing for painful cuts.
“The worst case scenario may not be as bad as projected earlier, but it’s still bad,” Roberts said. “We just don’t know by how much.”
Jo Weber, county Human Services Department director, said the budget reduces the average welfare grant for a family of two from $516 a month to $475 a month.
In addition to that 8 percent cut in CalWORKS grants, children will also see graduated reductions after they have been covered for five years, she said.
About 8,800 people in Sonoma County, including 6,665 children, currently receive grants. “Poverty isn’t a choice for children. It’s beyond their control,” Weber said.
If the governor’s tax plans fail, Weber said she is concerned that an “all-cuts budget” could further erode CalWORKS, reduce in-home support services for the elderly and disabled, and eliminate adult protective services programs.
The budget includes a 25 percent increase in payments to people who provide foster homes to children. That amounts to $10.7 million more statewide, including an estimated $100,000 in Sonoma County, Weber said.
A state parks official said Monday there was no change in the impending closure of 70 of the 278 parks in the system, including Annadel State Park in Santa Rosa, Sugarloaf Ridge just outside the city, Jack London in Glen Ellen and 20 other North Coast parks.
Redevelopment advocates were dismayed by Brown’s continued call for elimination of 398 redevelopment agencies statewide.
Sonoma County Administrator Veronica Ferguson said staff was “still digesting” all the information in the revision and will put together a report for the Board of Supervisors next Tuesday.
Staff writers Randi Rossmann, Sam Scott and Kevin McCallum contributed to this report.
—–O—–
Loading ... Loading ...
Subscribe by Email
Follow us on Twitter
@Not a Chance,
AGAIN, maybe the third time will be a charm, my initial post was strictly regarding whether education was a right expressly guaranteed by the U.S. Constiution. My position is that education isn’t a constitutional right PERIOD. You then responded to that post claiming I harbored some kind of rage against children of those here illegally. You asked to see my papers. And you again claimed the position of a federal constitutional right to education. I responded, and again you continue to make this about everything but the issue I addressed, whether education is a right expressly guaranteed by the U.S. constitution.
“So, that rage you interpret must be your own and that I cannot address.” How noble of you. Did you really just rubber and glue me? You have no idea what you sound like! Very smug ;).
Put your degrees away for a minute and stop pretending like you’re the only one who has them! I do too! And look–im not an arrogant blow hard about things (Ted, that’s not that bad). I don’t assume that throwing children out of public schools solves the problem. I believe, being well educated along side you, that education is an incredible benefit that ALL young children deserve the right to. Our brain is an incredible tool and I want every person to have the opportunity to achieve educational enlightenment, not just those who were lucky enough to be born in our great nation. And my family came over on the boat too, from Ireland in 1953, so you don’t own that argument.
@Not a Chance,
First, unless you have firsthand knowledge of Thomas Paine’s grave, you are making quite an assumption that he’s rolling in it.
Second, my point was quite narrow, and didn’t address my feelings on public education per se, only that education itself is NOT a constitutional right. I do believe it’s important to understand what a document does in fact say when it’s quoted. I also never brought up the issue of illegal immigrants or their children, others such as yourself did that and my response was limited to the issues raised by Plyler v. Doe.
And, as to the rage you allege I directed to the children of people here illegally, neither my initial comment or my follow up comments even directly discussed that issue. So, that rage you interpet must be your own and that I cannot address.
BTW, How does that case’s holding drive my original argument into the ground, when my original argument was that education isn’t a constitutionl right? The Justices’ actually agreed that it wasn’t (education is not a fundamental right), but held that since states have decided to tax and spend on education, they can’t then deny it to students based on immigration status. In other words, while education isn’t a right, if you decide to provide it you can’t then deny it based on immigration status, which involves equal protection. That is a totally separate set of analysis and rights, a right to equal treatment and access to programs provided, is not the same thing as claiming that those programs themselves are a constitutional right.
I’d be happy to show my papers. I’m very proud to be born and raised in the U.S. Both my parents immigrated legally from Britain and Germany. My husband’s family immigrated legally from Japan. And I worked two jobs to be able to put myself through both undergraduate and graduate school. I appreciate my education, and I never expected or demanded that others pay my way or that I was entitled it, but I wanted it and so I worked to achieve it.
@Common Sense (every time you use that name Thomas Paine rolls in his grave)
Why do you have so much rage toward children that had no choice but to be here? It wasn’t their choice to come to the US, their parents brought them to the states. And for the most part I would assume that these children are going to become a large part of our future, I’d rather them be educated and productive members of our society, its better than the alternative. Don’t forget at one time or another your family came to the states, legally or otherwise, for the same reasons freedom and prosperity.
FYI!!!! “In other words, since States have taken on the burden of public education, you cannot then deny a public education based on the “illegal” status of the student” THANK YOU FOR HELPING. You walked right into that one. It may not help Jamie’s constitutional argument but it most certainly drives your original argument directly into the ground. Round of applause for common sense, unless your an illegal alien, or look like one, then we DEMAND TO SEE YOUR PAPERS! ;)
@Anthony Michaelson,
Actually I do not owe Jaime a apology for a few reasons.
One, my post clearly points out that the Federal Constitution doesn’t “expressly” make education a right, although case law may interpet it as one implied, although I’m unaware of any such case law. Nothing about that assertion is incorrect given you citation of the Plyler case.
Second, after reviewing the citation provided by the subsequent post, there is still no basis for apology. The case cited Plyler v. Doe, holds NOT that education is a right via the Federal Constitution, but that to deny STATE funds from LOCAL school districts, based on the immigration status of their student populations, is a violation of the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution. Guess what, that holding doesn’t equate to education being a federal right/entitlement under the U.S. Constitution. In fact, in the body of the opinion, the Court clearly states that undocuments students aren’t a suspect class and education is NOT a fundamental right. In other words, since States have taken on the burden of public education, you cannot then deny a public education based on the “illegal” status of the student. That is a different issue and analysis then whether or not education is a right guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
FYI, I’ve attended and graduated from both a undergraduate and graduate education program, one public and one private institution, so I guess if you have a beef with the quality of my education, you need to address that to those who provided it.
@Common Sense You Jaime Santos an apology. He/She is right the US constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court holds that it violates the Equal Protection clause to deny public education to undocumented immigrant children. The Case law establishes the breadth and reach of our Constition. Plyer vs Doe is the law as per our COnstitution. For your information, many constitutional rights we hold dear are not “expressly’ written in the Constitution (it’s an old document) And ahem..speaking of education…you might want to get yourself some. Try the public library!
Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982) held that a Texas statute which withholds from local school districts any state funds for the education of children who were not “legally admitted” into the United States, and which authorizes local school districts to deny enrollment to such children, violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
@Jaime Santos,
Actually, no where in the U.S. Constitution does it expressly state that anyone, illegally present or otherwise is entitled to a education funded by federal tax dollars.
There may be case law in this area which interpets the some of the express language in that way, although I’m not aware of any. Generally, public education is a state right/issue. So, please don’t lecture others on their lack of knowledge when you clearly haven’t read it yourself or are quoting case law and not the actual document.
According to the most recent census data, 15% of California public school students are children of illegal aliens.
@The Hammer: If the children of “illegals” are citizens they are entitled to public education. IN fact, even if they are NOT citizens they are entitled to education.That’s just the way the US Constitution (you might want to look into that) is. It’s also just plain common sense and one of the basic tenets of a ‘civilized’ society. Those are the facts.
Can anyone give me the percent of students in our schools whose parents are illegal in this state? Then can someone tell me how much, by removing these students, would it effect the budget of the schools? I am just wondering if the schools’ budget issue is caused by the children of illegals. Just looking for the facts.
I’m glad to see the “May Revise” includes the closing of 43 useless boards and commissions. This belated action is but one example of the successes to be had by resisting tax increases or extensions. Had Gov. Brown’s proposed tax extensions gone through, you can bet these boards and commissions would have remained. Had he cut them in the first round of cuts and reallocated the money wased on them toward education, perhaps we could have avoided this whole ugly taxes versus education debate that divides us.
Abolish Public Employee Unions!