Mandatory minimum education funding in California has been a part of the state budget the last twenty years. Proposition 98, passed in 1988, guarantees a minimum amount of state and property tax revenue each year for K-14 education (Kindergarten through Community College). The amount is based upon the fiscal health of the state's economy for a given year. The California community colleges system (CCC) has received approximately 10% of Prop. 98 funds in recent years.

Proposition 92, introduced in 2007, would allocate 10.46% of Prop. 98 funding towards community colleges. The initiative would change Prop. 98 by separating funding of K-12 and community colleges. Each system who have minimum funding formulas. The K-12 formula would maintain the current Prop. 98 formula. Prop. 92 would introduce a new formula for the community college system. Minimum funding would now depend on a growth factor based on the population of young adults, between the ages of 17 and 22 years or age and between 22 and 25 years of age respectively. The growth factor would also be tied to the state's unemployment rate. Student enrollment would not be a basis for community college system funding requirement under the proposition, unlike that of K-12 education.

Proposition 92 would also lower student fees, which have traditionally made up a small portion of education costs. The fees would drop from $20 to $15 a unit beginning in the fall of 2008. The proposition would limit any future fee increase brought about by the legislature by requiring a two-thirds vote of both the Assembly and the Senate. Additional limits would also be in place which would tie fee increases to percentage changes in per capital personal income in California.

Prop. 92 would amend the state constitution by naming the community college system as part of the state's public school system. The constitution has not formally recognized the community college system previously. The CCC has become a formal body based on legislation adopted over time. Prop. 92 would allow for more members in the CCC's Board of Governors. The BOG would also have more control over administering the statewide system.

Key Provisions:

• Alters state constitution to establish a system of community college districts and a board of governors.
• 10.46% of current Prop. 98 funding would be used for community colleges.
• Calculates minimum state funding levels seperately for K-12 education and community colleges.
• Establishes $15 fees per unit taken. Only cost of living increases could cause fees to be raised.
• Limits on Legislature's ability to raise fees in the future.

Proponents of Prop. 92 believe that California community college system has been woefully underfunded in past years. They clain that the initiative will finally provide a fair percentage of education funding to a system which serves 2.5 million students on 109 campuses. Supporters believe increased community college funding will mean more disadvantaged young adults will be able to receive a college education.

Critics argue that the state will be forced to use K-12 funds to cover increased spending under the initiative. Opposition groups believe that the legislature would have to fund the measure by cutting other programs like K-12 and state universities. They also believe that Prop. 92 does not provide adequate oversight for the CCC's Board of Governors, who, under the law, can set salaries and benefits independently. They oppose the proposition's lmitations on legislative actions to raise fees. Finally, critics say that California's community college fees are already the lowest in the nation and that the five dollar decrease is not needed.

Arguably two of the most powerful teacher groups in the state, The California Federation of Teachers union and the California Teacher's Association are in a rare disagreement over the initiative. The CFT supports the proposal, saying that altering Prop. 98 spending formula is the best way to mandate additional community college spending. The CTA believes the proposition will jeapordize K-12 funding which is already inadequate given the state's current and future budget deficit.

Title and Summary

Analysis by Legislative Analyst's Office

Arguments For and Against

Individual Campaign Committees
Committees formed to support or oppose the ballot measure.

Californians for Community Colleges
Pro-Prop. 92 page.

No on Proposition 92

California Teachers Association
Opposes Prop. 92

What Would Proposition 92 Mean for California? California Budget Project, December 2007.

Campaign Videos

Yes on Prop. 92
You-Tube Video Channel

The following citations include links to full-text articles online, when they are available. Some restrictions on use apply, due to licensing requirements. For more information, see Tips for Finding Full-Text Articles.