School policies on facility dating administartion
In response to these critiques, this year Governor Jerry Brown proposed an overhaul of our school finance system.Also, two initiatives on the November ballot asked voters to increase education funding through tax increases: voters approved Proposition 30, which was integral to the governor’s budget plan, and rejected Proposition 38, a citizens’ initiative.In terms of categories of school spending, the vast majority (85%) is for staff salaries and benefits (Figure 3), with the remaining 15 percent of funds used to purchase books and supplies and other items such as insurance and utilities.When spending is broken down by activity, most of it (71%) goes toward instructional activities and services, such as class instruction, counseling, and transportation.Approximately 16 percent of all spending, including debt service and facilities, support school and district administration.NOTES: Spending categories exclude capital expenditures. Other spending categories include travel, dues, insurance, consulting, and operating expenses.In 1971, the California Supreme Court ruled that this system was unconstitutional and ordered the state to equalize funding across districts.Then, in 1978, voters passed Proposition 13, which created a statewide property tax rate set at 1 percent of assessed value and limited annual increases in assessed value.
In response to decreased funding, school districts have made significant reductions in the number of teachers and other certificated staff they employ, including school administrators, counselors, librarians, and nurses.
Nationally, roughly 44 percent of school funding comes from state and local sources and 12 percent comes from the federal government.
The main driver of state revenues for California schools is Proposition 98, a 1988 initiative that set a minimum state spending level for K–12 school and community colleges roughly 40 percent of the state’s general fund.
California’s class sizes are among the largest in the nation.
Given its complicated history, it is not surprising that California’s school finance system is widely criticized for three major flaws: it is inadequate, inequitable, and overly complex.