Analysis of PAVE2000
Notes in blue added by Proponent, John J. "Jack" Hickey
Joint Legislative Budget Committee
STEVE PEACE DENISE MORENO DUCHENY
MAURICE K. JOHANNESSEN
PATRICK JOHNSTON TONY CARDENAS
TIM LESLIE JIM CUNNEEN
JACK O'CONNELL FRED KEELEY
RICHARD O. POLANCO CAROLE MIGDEN
JOHN VASCONCELLOS GEORGE RUNNER
CATHIE WRIGHT RODERICK WRIGHT
925 L STREET, SUITE 1000
SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95814
Received Feb. 25, 2000
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE
Hon. Bill Lockyer Attorney General
1300 I Street, 17th Floor
Sacramento, California 95814
Ms. Diane Calkins Initiative Coordinator
Dear Attorney General Lockyer:
Pursuant to Election Code Section 9005, we have reviewed the proposed initiative called "Performance Accountability Voucher for Education" (File No. SA2000RF0006).
If enacted by the voters, this constitutional measure would make dramatic changes in the state's role in education. The measure would:
Note: It is not the intent of PAVE2000 to interfere with the operation or charter of the Community Colleges or the State Universities. See: PAVE2000 Sec. 14. COMMUNITY COLLEGES The Legislature shall have power, by general law, to provide for the incorporation, organization and funding of community college districts.
If enacted by the voters, this measure would have the following major fiscal effects.
Impact on State and Local School Costs
The measure initially sets a maximum amount that can be spent on K-12 public schools and certificates. In the first year, this amount is higher than what the state and local schools would be required to spend (under the state's Proposition 98 minimum funding guarantee), due to certificate payments to existing private school students and to students ages 18 through 21. We estimate a potential state cost of over $2 billion in the first year. Note: PAVE2000 Section 3f. payments for students not previously enrolled in Public Schools in any of the preceding two years prior to passage of this Amendment may be Legislatively deferred, with payment in full to be made no later than four years after passage of this Amendment.
Thereafter, however, the maximum amount of school spending would be less than what the state otherwise would have spent. We estimate that annual savings would be in the billions of dollars in the near term, growing rapidly to about $100 billion annually by the time school spending is ended after 20 years. These savings would accrue to the state and to local property taxpayers.
Revenues From the Sale of Public School Property
The state has over 8,000 schools varying in size from only a few students to over 5,000 students. The sales of these schools would generate revenues which could be in excess of $100 billion. These one-time revenues, first, would provide relief to local property taxpayers (who would no longer pay "add-on" property tax rates to refire the costs of school facilities) and, second, would accrue to the state. Note: PAVE2000 Section 5a. The Legislature shall provide for a phaseout of public schools by disposition of the publicly-owned educational properties in this State, with monies accruing therefrom being first applied to reduce bonded indebtedness, and then applied to funding of the Educational Performance Fund.
Other Fiscal Effects
Capital Outlay Savings. Historically, state and local governments spend as much as $1 billion annually to build new schools and maintain and renovate existing schools. Closing the public schools would save state and local schools this annual cost.
Potential Loss of Federal Funds. The state implements many education programs required by the federal government. This amendment could result in California not complying with federal law. For example, the state is required to offer special education services to all students needing such services, and ensure that students receive appropriate education services. Under this amendment, the state may not be able to guarantee that each special education student receives appropriate services. The state receives over $3.6 billion annually from the federal government for K-12 education. Most of this funding only goes to public schools and not to private schools. Since this amendment would close all of the public schools, the state would lose most of this funding. Note: PAVE2000 Section 5e. The Legislature shall provide for Federal education resources, originating from assets of the citizens of California, to be recaptured at the state level for inclusion in the Fund.
Potential Impact on the General Economy. The measure may have large macroeconomic effects on the state's economy resulting from such changes as: the sell-off of public school assets, reductions in state and local taxes, and impacts on the quantity and quality of education provided in the state. Since these macroeconomic effects would interact with each other, it is difficult to predict the overall impact the amendment would have on the state's general economy over time.
Summary of Fiscal Effects
This measure would have the following major fiscal effects:
Elizabeth G. Hill
B. Timothy Gage
Director of Finance
TEXT of PAVE2000 AG Title and Summary