From the Silicon Valley Education Foundation:
A partnership of education, parent, and business groups is aiming to put on the November 2012 ballot an initiative combining sweeping education reforms with a tax increase dedicated to preschool to twelfth grade, called The 2012 Kids Education Plan.
In a short statement (see below), the dozen groups used the code words for fundamental changes in school funding and personnel laws like teacher tenure without yet citing specifics: “a student centered finance system, true transparency, significant workforce reforms, and new investments in education through a statewide broad based revenue source and lowering the voter threshold on local revenue” (a reference to the current two-thirds majority needed to pass a parcel tax).
Ted Lempert, president of Oakland-based Children Now, said the groups were considering a tax that would raise $6 billion to $8 billion annually for education – the equivalent of roughly an additional $1,000 to $1,330 per student – an amount that would recover much of the state funding that has been cut over the past three years. While a big ask in a recession, it would still fall shy of raising California’s per-student funding to the national average.
Proposition 10, passed in 1998 imposed taxes for early childhood development. It was narrowly passed and had the backing of liberal Rob Reiner. It has collected about $5 billion in tax revenue since it was passed. What has it accomplished? Very little. Fresno County issued a report in 2009 that said the program accomplished basically nothing. In fact, a nonpartisan study of the Fresno expenditures of these tax dollars showed that of more than 400 families receiving services paid for under this “tax for the kids”, the parents receiving the most services showed the least improvement in their “nurturing” skills.
Many bond measures have passed to fund public education in California; they almost always pass.
The state lottery was sold to voters as a way to fund schooling, and since 1985 has “contributed” $20 billion (in mandates) to public education in California.
Though liberals generate press releases about education funding in California being among the lowest in the nation, they don’t give any attention to the fact that pay for union teachers is among the highest in the nation. Is it any wonder California’s test scores are so low? The problem is a spending problem, not a funding problem.
The average teacher salary in California seems to always be higher than the national average. In 2009, the average teacher salary in California was $60,583, considerably higher than the national average of $49,720. The national average was $48,353 in 2008, while California boasted an average of $60,250.
California teacher salaries have increased by a total of 4.1 percent from 2007 to 2009. With average teaching salaries in California already being relatively high, the annual increases have been smaller than in some other states. The annual average teacher salary rose from $58,197 to $60,250 from 2007 to 2008 and then to $60,583 in 2009.
Teaching salaries in California have remained fairly consistent in terms of national ranking. From 2007 to 2008, the average teacher salary in California ranking remained the same at 5th. Then, from 2008 to 2009, California teacher salaries dropped slightly to 6th place nationally.
Teacher salaries in California have increased slightly over the past few years. Observe the trends in the California teacher salary schedule below:
Average Salary Percent Change
Rank 2009 Rank 2008 Rank 2007 2008 to 2009 2007 to 2008 2007 to 2009
California 6 $60,583.33 5 $60,250.00 5 $58,196.67 0.55% 3.53% 4.10%
Beware! Communists using children to further their agenda. This has went on way too long.
Listen folks. The ‘better living through social collectivism’ folks are seeking to cowtow you by shaming you (“ITS FOR THE CHILDREN!!”). Want to stop it all cold? Simply state that you are all for the idea………the moment after a city-wide charter school policy has been adopted, and has been implimented. The teachers unions will make absolutely sure this proposal goes no farther. They would rather protect their contract wage scales, tenure, pensions, and accept sub-par student performance, than risk being fired for incompetency in a contract school environment. Think about it.