However, later news reports mention that UC might get $50 million beyond what the governor had originally proposed, depending on whether property taxes were above what was forecast. Now the property tax is a local tax so it may seem surprising that it figures in what UC gets. However, under Prop 98, K-14 gets state funding under various formulas. But what the school districts get from the local property tax figures into the total obligation. So if there is more property tax, there will be less of a burden on the state. Yours truly assumes this linkage is what the deal for UC (CSU gets the same) is all about.
Of course, it may seem odd to base the UC budget on the vagaries of the real estate market. But that would not be the only odd thing about the state budget.
Even if the $50 million arrives, it would be less than half of what the Regents requested beyond the governor's proposal for ongoing UC expenses. However, there is also reported to be an extra $100 million for "deferred maintenance" which probably goes into the capital budget. Again, you should keep in mind that these are news reports, not actual budget language. In the official media release, higher ed spending is not mentioned: http://gov.ca.gov/news.php?id=18557 The legislature has until Sunday midnight to enact the actual budget bill. The governor has a line item veto so he could chop out the UC increment, whatever it is.
You can find mentions of the UC budget increment at:
http://www.dailynews.com/government-and-politics/20140613/10-things-to-know-about-the-california-budget
http://dailybruin.com/2014/06/13/uc-to-receive-50m-more-in-funding-if-tax-revenue-exceeds-expectations/
http://www.sacbee.com/2014/06/12/6480411/budget-deal-spends-cap-and-trade.html
A radio interview with senate president Steinberg on the budget deal is at:
No comments:
Post a Comment