District opposes measure

The funding of California public schools is a necessity not a luxury,

and the state must not turn its back on that need. That was the

message the Burbank Unified School Board sent Thursday when trustees

approved a resolution that opposes a ballot measure that would

overturn a minimum funding guarantee to schools.

Proposition 76, referred to as the “Live Within Our Means” act,

would overturn the required minimum amount of funding that California

schools were guaranteed under Proposition 98, passed in 1988.

The required funding amounts to about 40% of the state’s annual

budget, district officials said.

The proposition would allow the governor to make midyear

unilateral budget cuts to schools if he determined that state

revenues are too low.

Proposition 76 will be on the ballot in the California Special

Election on Nov. 8.

Supt. Gregory Bowman, who presented the resolution, said that

midyear budget cuts would make it difficult for the school district

to operate, possibly leading to employee layoffs and a lack of

supplies for students in the later months of the school year.

“It’s very difficult when you plan for something and suddenly your

income is decreased,” he said.

If the proposition is passed, the Burbank Unified School District

could lose $9 million from the state in operating costs and have $600

less per student spending a year, according to Bowman’s report to the

board.

“The real losers here are the students,” he said.

Burbank Teachers Assn. Co-president Kim Allender worried that the

proposition would allow for the governor to have unprecedented power

over the school budgets.

“That’s very dangerous, especially in a time when education is

already under funded,” said Allender. “It’s not a good thing to give

any governor the ability to make cuts that have no checks and

balances.”

Allender, a fifth-grade teacher at Miller Elementary, felt the

governor’s borrowing of $3.1 billion guaranteed to schools under

Proposition 98 to balance the state budget should make voters worried

about the consequences of proposition 76.

“There’s no reason but to continue to suspect he’d cut our funds

in a misguided effort to balance the stage budget on the backs of

school children,” Allender said.

Although all the board members voted for the measure, some

expressed conflict over having to decide between providing for the

district and its $109 million budget and being sensitive to the

state’s budget problems.

“I support the spirit of what the governor is trying to achieve,”

said Larry Applebaum.

However he ultimately voted for the resolution opposing

Proposition 76 because it would leave the district, and all

California schools, “vulnerable and exposed.”

Board President Paul Krekorian expressed no reservations about

supporting the resolution.

“I’m not conflicted about supporting this resolution at all,”

Krekorian said, adding that the district has always lived within

means when a budget was adopted.

Krekorian said that while giving up certain luxuries in a time of

financial crisis is necessary, the education of Burbank students is

hardly a luxury.

“All of us can understand the concept of having to live within our

means,” he said, comparing it to when individual families have to

give up extra vacations and dinners out to conserve money. “But

public education is not an option and it’s not a luxury.”

To read the complete text of the proposition and other ballet

measures visit: o7www.ss.ca.gov/elections/ elections_j.htm.

f7