Opinion
- Details
- Written by: Mark Bredt
For several years state legislators have rattled their swords regarding the governance of community colleges – the proposal has been to develop a state board to oversee the community college system eliminating local control of the individual districts. The founding premise of the COMMUNITY college system is to provide local supervision of the college system and responsiveness to the needs and ambitions of the community that supports it. The community college is charged with providing educational support and assistance in partnership with community government and local business. Rural California colleges would suffer most under a centralized state governance. Proposition 92 guarantees a stable system of independent college districts.
The California Community College system is under funded, the current apportionment of funds, set by Proposition 98 dictates that 11 percent of education funding be directed to community colleges and 89 percent be directed to the K-12 system. Historically the legislature has been very cavalier in suspending this agreement – over the past 10 years funding for community colleges is in arrears over $4 billion. Proposition 92 separates the Community College system from the K-12 system and sets minimum levels of state funding based on COMMUNITY COLLEGE growth instead of being indexed as a percentage of K-12 population. California ranks 45 out of 49 states in support per full-time student revenue.
In the 2003-2004 budget legislators doubled student enrollment fees for community colleges as a source of revenue for state budget deficits. Funding to community colleges was also decreased by a similar amount. Student enrollment dropped by more than 300,000 students statewide. Our college district fared better than most due to effective management and planning but, we were forced to layoff faculty and staff and cut programs to balance our budget. While students paid twice as much to attend college we were forced to provide fewer classes, less supportive services, fewer opportunities. Proposition 92 will stabilize funding, secure student access, and allow our local governing board to be proactive in planning programs that support our community needs. That is far better than the current process of holding our breath, each year, wondering if we're going to receive funding.
A healthy community college system helps to grow California's middle class and bolsters the state's economy, offering every California resident an opportunity to attend college. California community colleges provide an education for 2.5 million students compared to the 180,000 students in the University of California system and 380,000 students attending California State Universities.
California's community colleges partners with labor to provide 160 apprenticeship programs – 250,000 apprentices on 35 campuses. Forty colleges, including the Yuba Community College District, provide Police Officers Standards and Training (POST) academies. Another 64 colleges offer fire technology programs to train our firefighters. Nearly three quarters of registered nurses in California received training through their community colleges.
A healthy California Community College system supports diversity and offers higher education to students who might otherwise be unable to afford college. There are 463,000 Latino students, 118,000 African-American students, and more than 250,000 students of other minorities attending community colleges. This represents a higher minority population than the UC and CSU systems combined.
Proposition 92 lowers the current fees to attend a community college to $15 per unit, placing a college education in the reach of every Californian. It limits increases in student fees to cost of living adjustments. It provides stable funding indexed to student enrollment. The California Postsecondary Education Commission is projecting that there will be 375,000 to 525,000 additional applicants to the community college system over the next three years. We need to be funded and prepared for this surge.
Vote YES on Proposition 92.
Mark Bredt is District 4 (Lake County) Representative on the Yuba Community College District Board of Trustees. He lives in Clearlake Park.
{mos_sb_discuss:4}
- Details
- Written by: Andrea Anderson
When you vote…
Do you vote for your team or the best person for the job?
Do you vote for the most popular person or do you vote for the most intelligent person?
Do you vote for the person who looks respectable or do you vote for the person who has earned your respect?
Do you vote according to your standards or the standards of your peers or party?
Do you do your own research on the candidates or do you rely on commercials, catch phrases, and/or corporate media to make your decisions for you?
Does your vote have your personal stamp of approval or does it simply have the stamp of approval of your party?
Before you vote, this year, take some time to ask yourself these questions and one last vital question:
Are you electing someone according to your conscience or are you selecting someone according to someone else’s agenda and/or persuasion?
Andrea Anderson lives in Lakeport.
{mos_sb_discuss:4}
- Details
- Written by: Wanda Harris
We have found no provision in the proposal that would eliminate the type of ‘denial of care’ that recently resulted in the death of 17-year-old Nataline Sarkaysian in Los Angeles. Would SB 840 have allowed her to die?
The funding mechanisms for this proposal are inadequate and tenuous at best. A large part of the funding relies on federal dollars yet to be budgeted or approved, the lease of the California Lottery and an increase in the tobacco taxes to somewhere in the neighborhood of 400 percent. The lease of the lottery will reduce the dollars for our educational system and sales of lottery tickets increase the percentage of the state’s revenues from low income Californians. Recent tobacco tax increases have demonstrated that they reduce consumption, which reduces the tax income to the state from the tax increases. Whereas the vast majority of tobacco users are low-income citizens, this tax is an additional burden on those who can least afford it.
Even if insurance company administration costs were actually capped at 15 percent, that is still 12 percent more than the 3 percent that Medicare administration costs. Why pay more for an inferior product?
We believe that government is good. We believe in good government. We believe that government should inspire, assist and protect all of its citizens equally rather than just those who contribute large campaign funds. This proposal distracts and reduces the public’s outcry for real health care reform.
Medicare is a proven and workable single payer health care insurance system.
There is an effective workable solution to California’s health care crises: SB840.
We want nothing less than the best health care insurance for all Californians.
Wanda Harris is chair of the Lake County Democratic Central Committee.
{mos_sb_discuss:4}
- Details
- Written by: Donna Christopher
The solution is very simple – log out after each post. It really isn't that hard to do, only takes a second or two. Then log on again if there is another article you wish to blog on. That too will take a couple of seconds.
This will be hard on the generation of instant gratification but then again, that extra second may make folks rethink if what they have to say is really necessary.
Donna Christopher lives in Lucerne.
{mos_sb_discuss:4}
How to resolve AdBlock issue?