Assemblyman Swanson made available booklets, maybe one of a series, A Guide to Participation “The California State Budget Process”. I am sure you can be sent one, just call his office 510 286-1670. Here is some info from the booklet:

CA GEN FUND REVENUES:
A. Personal Income Tax—50.5%
B. Sales Tax – 32.6%
C. Corporation Taxes – 9.8%
D. Tobacco Tax – 0.2%
E. Insurance Tax - 2.8%
F. Estate Taxes - 0.2%
G. Liquor Tax - 0.4%
H. Other – 3.5%

My guess is that State share of property taxes are part of “other”, and/or that share of property tax which must be used for education is not in the general fund but in a “restricted fund”. But Mark, if you read the facts presented that is not the case, I wish it were, so Arnold could not use it for anything else. Actually The same page in the booklet states that the #1 expenditure of the General Fund is K-12 Education (43.3%)

Mark – the reason you think Prop #13 was the demise of education is because you grew up in an affluent area. From the same booklet:

1978 – Proposition #13 – Capped property tax rates and limited hikes in accessed values. Gave control of local property tax revenues to the state and required a 2/3 majority vote of the Legislator to increase taxes.

So while affluent areas lost a portion of their local property taxes, less fortunate or repressed areas received more money so they too could offer a quality education. Of course really affluent neighborhoods like Alameda’s gold coast could directly donate to their local school. I have heard that Franklin is AUSD’s ‘private’ school.

O.K., since DK was being so coy, in #76 I was going to guess property tax is something real low like 3% and amazingly property taxes are not listed outright at all, but must be part the 4th largest on the list, “other” at 3.5%. That is a huge surprise to me, but one wonders what the talk about the negative impact of Prop 13 all these years, a totally hollow myth?

When John Russo ran against Sandre, reforming Prop 13 for commercial was a plank in his platform. I want to know what it is I don’t know.

I thought Swanson told us sales and income taxes total 75%. The chart says 83%??

Anyway, next question 3.5% is how many dollars? How much more might be available if Prop 13 suspended so much potential tax revenue? Do corporation taxes at 9.8% possibly reflect property tax in that sector?

Since I was listening to speakers yesterday, this is the first I’ve cracked the booklets they gave out. Its probably not too significant, but the pie chart for General Fund Revenue appears not to match the percentages for components listed to the side.

Get real Mark I. Kirwin’s # 72 speaks clearly who is cannibalizing the CA economy. It’s you spenders then tax, tax and tax. When you can’t tax anymore you blame your mess on the rich. CA tax rates are 9.3% for income over $40,346. Maybe you anarchists should design a new bumper sticker, like maybe “Eat Me”.

I was at the event too and heard your comments. Now I’m pretty sure what I heard you say to Sandre. You seem to be saying that since property taxes are 15% or less of the base, Prop 13 isn’t that much of the problem because the majority of tax base is from income and sales tax? Think of it another way. Without Prop 13, property taxes might constitute a more substantial proportion of the tax base and we wouldn’t be in as bad a mess. Am I misconstruing your hammer comment? (it was “3rd rail” yesterday)

In terms of new residential real estate I would like to know what percentages are hit by what rates based on when they were last sold. I would really like to understand statistically what the impact of Prop 13 has been on the commercial side. Seeing these stats charted out might begin to clarify what the real potential impacts of reform to be. We do know that the demise of school funding in CA correlates directly to Prop 13. Coincidence?

After the meeting I was as depressed as inspired and came away thinking about the old anarchist bumper sticker from the 70’s “Eat the Rich!” They are certainly cannibalizing the economy. Things like the yacht tax loop-hole are outrageous!

All in all, Sandre and Co. weren’t talking about Prop 13 reform or equalization for school funding in the short term because the intensity of the budget fight won’t allow it. We’re in triage mode.

I went to the assembly of State Assembly reps this morning at Encinal. I heard Assemblyman John Laird, chair of the budget committee, talk about ‘how we got into this mess’. He stated that 85% of State revenue comes from Personal Income tax and Sales Tax, so it Prop 13 is not the huge hammer that broke the state of CA.
Laird says just the lowering of the new vehicle license fee and the creation of debt bonds is costing next year’s budget over $9 Billion. That amount exceeds what Arnold said the shortfall was. I say was because on May 14 the gov’s budget is due out. Word is that the ’shortfall’ has increased.

The Republican side has a proposal to put $2.1 Billion back into edu. which they say will meet Prop #98 edu funding requirements. However what they want in exchange is a “relaxing” of state ADA (disability) standards, a “relaxing” of the 8-hr workday laws, and a “relaxing” for the timetable for state ‘greenhouse’ emissions.

Somebody at the meeting also mentioned that in a recent interview Warren Buffet stated that this recession will be deeper and longer than anyone is yet willing to say.

Another comment that illustrates St. Laurens complete lack of education as to the “how” of charters working. This is a simplification but essentially the charter is responsible for it’s own operating cost and is financially independent from the district and it’s financial woes and musings.

I can understand, DK, so many responsibilities, so little time, so much change, so many dip shit leaders, so many dumb kids, we’re so apart…the horror, the horror…