Become part of the movement for unbiased, accessible election information. Donate today.
California Proposition 49, Increase Funding for Before and After School Programs Initiative (2002)
| California Proposition 49 | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Election date November 5, 2002 | |
| Topic Education | |
Status Approved | |
| Type State statute | Origin Citizens |
California Proposition 49 was on the ballot as an initiated state statute in California on November 5, 2002. It was approved.
A "yes" vote supported increasing grants for before and after school programs and making every public school, including charter schools, eligible for grants. |
A "no" vote opposed increasing grants for before and after school programs and making every public school, including charter schools, eligible for grants. |
Election results
|
California Proposition 49 |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
|
|
4,024,904 | 56.62% | ||
| No | 3,084,122 | 43.38% | ||
Measure design
Proposition 49 increased funding for before and after school programs in California. Starting in 2004-2005, it permanently earmarked a portion of the state's general fund for grants ranging from $50,000 to $75,000 for before and after school programs.
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title for Proposition 49 was as follows:
| “ | ” |
Ballot summary
The ballot summary for this measure was:
| “ |
• Increases state grant funds available for before/after school programs, providing tutoring, homework assistance, and educational enrichment. • Makes every public elementary, middle/junior high school, including charter schools, eligible for after school grants ranging from $50,000–$75,000. Maintains local funding match requirement. • Provides priority for additional funding to schools with predominantly low-income students. • Requires that, beginning 2004–05, new funding for before/after school programs not be taken from education funding, guaranteed under Proposition 98. Gives priority to schools already receiving grants and requires increasing expenditures only if state revenues grow. | ” |
Full Text
The full text of this measure is available here.
Fiscal impact
- See also: Fiscal impact statement
The fiscal estimate provided by the California Legislative Analyst's Office said:[1]
| “ | This measure would have a major fiscal effect of additional annual state costs for before and after school programs that could exceed $400 million annually, beginning in 2004-2005.[2] | ” |
Support
Official arguments
The official arguments in support of Proposition 49 were submitted by Arnold Schwarzenegger; Wayne Johnson, president of the California Teachers Association; and Warren Rupf, president of the California State Sheriffs’ Association:[3]
| “ |
Proposition 49 will:
Proposition 49 is funded out of future growth in state revenues, but only after our economy has recovered. IT WILL NOT REQUIRE AN INCREASE IN TAXES OR AFFECT THE CURRENT BUDGET. The prestigious Rose Institute says Proposition 49 saves society approximately $9 for every $1 invested. THE RETURN TO TAXPAYERS ALONE IS APPROXIMATELY 3 DOLLARS FOR EVERY 1 TAX DOLLAR INVESTED. That’s why it’s endorsed by taxpayer watchdog groups such as the California Taxpayers’ Association, the National Tax Limitation Committee and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. Proposition 49 provides over $400 million in direct grants to elementary and junior high schools. These funds can ONLY be used for after school programs. Recent studies of existing after school programs by major universities and think tanks such as UCLA, UC Irvine, USC, and the Rand Institute are unanimous—after school programs change lives by improving grades and reducing crime. POLICE STATISTICS SHOW THAT VIOLENT JUVENILE CRIME—HOMICIDE, RAPE, ROBBERY, AND ASSAULT— INCREASES DRAMATICALLY DURING THE AFTER SCHOOL HOURS BETWEEN 3PM AND 6PM, creating a 'danger zone' for our kids and our neighborhoods. 3PM to 6PM is the time when up to 1 million California kids under the age of 15 may be left unsupervised. These are the hours when kids are most likely to join gangs, use alcohol and tobacco, and become addicted to drugs. A study of the most crime-ridden schools in Los Angeles showed CRIME RATES DROPPED 40% WHEN THOSE SCHOOLS OFFERED AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAMS. In another study, vandalism and stealing plummeted 66%, while violent acts, carrying concealed weapons, and arrests were reduced 50% among program participants. PROPOSITION 49 IMPROVES GRADES AND TEST SCORES. Studies show that after school programs increase scores on standardized math and reading tests and improve grades, while decreasing the incidence of grade repetition, dropping out of school, and remedial education. Proposition 49 was put on the ballot by nearly 800,000 Californians. IT IS SUPPORTED BY THE WIDEST COALITION OF CALIFORNIANS OF ANY BALLOT MEASURE IN RECENT MEMORY. PROPOSITION 49 IS ENDORSED BY: LAW ENFORCEMENT: Attorney General Bill Lockyer, California State Sheriffs’ Association, California District Attorneys Association, California Narcotic Officers’ Association, California Peace Officers’ Association, California Police Activities League, Fight Crime: Invest in Kids, and almost 60 individual police chiefs. EDUCATION: California Teachers Association, California Parent Teachers Association (PTA), California School Employees Association, Children Now, and hundreds of school superintendents and principals. TAXPAYERS ORGANIZATIONS: California Taxpayers’ Association, National Tax Limitation Committee, Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. OTHER LEADERSHIP GROUPS: American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), California Chamber of Commerce, California Business Roundtable, California YMCA, California Girl Scouts, Hispanic 100, the Democratic Speaker of the Assembly, the Republican Leader of the Senate, over 70 Mayors and 200 other public officials of both parties, from Members of Congress to City Council members. JOIN US AT WWW.JOINARNOLD.COM.[2] |
” |
Opposition
Official arguments
The official arguments in opposition to Proposition 49 were submitted by Barbara Inatsugu, president of the League of Women Voters of California:[3]
| “ | Proposition 49 is a bad approach to a good cause. Prop 49 looks good, but in reality it disregards principles of good government by reducing government’s flexibility to respond to changing needs and priorities. It takes a specific after school program, which many people will see as worthwhile, and
sets it apart from all other needs funded by your tax dollars. Read carefully. Look beyond rhetoric. See the larger picture. This program will:
And because this program receives special protection from budget cuts, it means that in times of economic downturn other programs may be cut to fund it—even those with potentially greater impact on children. INADEQUATE PROVISIONS FOR RISING COSTS AND AN ONGOING BUDGET CRISIS. The drafters of this initiative say that other programs won’t be cut to pay for it, because they have included a provision that would only expand after school spending when spending on other programs has also significantly expanded. Their assumption is that if there is money to expand programs like health care or public safety, there should be money to expand after school programs too. The problem is that their trigger is too small. Inflation and population growth alone will require twice the amount they’ve calculated. In tough budget times like these, that will mean other programs will have to be cut, or taxes raised. A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT. Proposition 98, passed by voters in 1988, sets aside a portion of the state budget for K–14 education programs. But the amount spent on specific programs is still decided during the budget process, every year. No program, regardless of how worthy, gets a free ride—yet. Prop 49 is the first attempt to earmark money for one particular program within the Proposition 98 guarantee. Prop 49 would increase the Proposition 98 guarantee level without raising additional revenues so that programs funded outside the guarantee would be more vulnerable during economic downturns. If Prop 49 passes, other special interests will try similar measures in future elections. The result?
Look at the bigger picture. VOTE NO ON PROP 49.[2] |
” |
Path to the ballot
In California, the number of signatures required for an initiated state statute is equal to 5 percent of the votes cast at the preceding gubernatorial election. For initiated statutes filed in 2002, at least 419,260 valid signatures were required.
See also
External links
- Official Voter Guide
- Full text of Proposition 49
- Smart Voter information about Prop 49
- Official declaration of the November 5, 2002 vote
- Top Ten Donors to Proposition 49
Footnotes
