First of two parts
[img]1705|right|Mike Reynolds||no_popup[/img]Prop. 30, aimed at boosting government funding of the state’s public schools, was hugely controversial when it appeared on statewide ballots two years ago. That was more because it would raise taxes on incomes above $250,000 than for jumping the state sales tax from 7.25 to 7.50 percent.
Prop. 30 was even money going into Election Day, and won by a comfortable margin.
In Culver City, where there never was serious resistance, cheers still are resounding two months before 30’s second happy and non-controversial anniversary.
“Prop. 30 was a lifesaver,” says Mike Reynolds, the School District’s assistant superintendent for business. “That prevented the state from taking away about $3 million annually from our budget. If we had lost that money from our current ($50 million general fund) budget on an ongoing basis, it would have been devastating.
“Prop. 30 didn’t give us any additional funding,” Mr. Reynolds said. “But it stopped us from losing millions of dollars from our current level of state funding. That was major, major.”
What has the preserved $3 million allowed — or prevented in the School District?
“We were able to maintain our current level of services that have been in place because we didn’t lose the funding,” said Mr. Reynolds. “Otherwise there would have been significant cutbacks.”
With Measure EE, the parcel tax, due to expire in the 1015-16 school term, “we are taking steps now to be able to absorb that loss,” said the assistant super. “That is the one challenge we have at the moment, and we don’t see any significant reduction in services.”
(To be continued)
