Proposition 2 (the “Rainy Day Fund”) would amend the State Constitution to change how the state pays down debt and saves money in reserves.
BACKGROUND
The state has had budget reserve accounts for many years. It currently has two principal General Fund reserve accounts:
Special Fund for Economic Uncertainties (SFEU)
Article XIII B, Section 5.5 of the California Constitution directs the Legislature to establish a “prudent” reserve that it deems reasonable and necessary. However, the Constitution does not specify the size of the reserve or the conditions under which funds must be placed into the reserve.
The reserve for 2013-14 was included at $1.1 billion in the adopted budget, and later reduced to approximately $700 million based on additional budget actions related to corrections. This general reserve is known as the SFEU.
Budget Stabilization Account (“BSA”)
In 2004, voters passed Proposition 58 to create a new reserve. Currently, Prop. 58 requires the Governor each year to decide whether to let 3% of General Fund revenues (known as the “basic” amount, currently just over $3 billion) go into the BSA reserve. In any year, the Governor can choose to reduce the basic amount and put less or nothing at all into the BSA. Under Prop. 58, these amounts continue to go into the BSA each year until the balance reaches a target maximum, which currently equals $8 billion. (Therefore, it would take three years of the basic amount going into the account for the BSA to reach its maximum level.)
The state can take money out of the BSA with a majority vote of the Legislature. Right now, there is no limit on how much the state can take out of the BSA in a single year.
Education Reserve
Prop. 2 would also create a distinct budget stabilization fund known as the “Proposition 98 Reserve” or Public School System Stabilization Account (PSSSA). The PSSSA would be funded by a transfer of capital gains-related tax revenues in excess of 8% of General Fund revenues. Funds would be appropriated from the PSSSA when state support for K-14 education exceeds the allocation of General Fund revenues, allocated property taxes, and other available resources.
Though Prop. 2 changes when the state would spend money on schools and community colleges, it does not directly change the total amount of state spending for schools and community colleges over the long run.
LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICT RESERVES
State law requires school districts to keep minimum reserves, though many districts keep reserves that are much bigger than these minimum levels. For most school districts, the minimum reserve ranges from 1% to 5% of their annual budget, depending on their size. School districts save money in reserves for several reasons, such as paying for large occasional expenses (like replacing textbooks) and addressing the uncertainty in future state funding.
If Prop. 2 passes, a new state law would go into effect to set a maximum amount of reserves that school districts could keep at the local level, while the current minimum reserve levels would continue in effect. (Therefore, district reserves would have to be between the minimum and the maximum in these years.) For most school districts, the maximum amount of local reserves under this new law would be between 3% and 10% of their annual budget, depending on their size, a level lower than certain districts currently maintain. This new law would apply only in a year after money is put into the state reserve for schools described above.
It should be noted that the setting of maximum reserves is not part of Prop. 2 itself, but rather was included in a budget trailer bill, which is subject to future legislative change. Very recently several state legislators attempted to introduce new legislation to reverse the budget trailer bill impact on school reserves, but so far this effort has not been successful.
LAO REPORT
The Legislative Analyst’s report indicated that when in a year capital gains-related taxes exceed 8% of total General Fund revenues, then a portion of this excess goes into both (a) the Budget Stabilization Account and (b) the Public School System Stabilization Account. First, a calculation is made as to how much of this excess is allocable to education under the provisions of Prop. 98, and that amount would be eligible to go into the PSSSA if a transfer into that reserve is made for the particular year. The remaining amount of the excess over 8% would be part of the BSA transfer.
- Prop. 2’s limiting of school districts’ reserves can result in possible higher costs and deeper cuts.
- Prop. 2’s schools reserve would withhold school funding at a time when California is ranked 50th in the nation in adjusted per-pupil spending.
- Prop. 2 establishes a double standard—prudent reserves for the state, but limited reserves for school districts.
- Prop. 2 establishes a strong constitutional reserve fund, which will force state government to save money and pay down debts.
- It will protect schools by stabilizing the state budget and preventing future cuts to our schools and classrooms.
- Prop. 2 will shield taxpayers from unnecessary tax increases and protect schools from devastating cuts.
Yes on Proposition 2 • www.YesOnProps1and2.com
Supporters of Prop. 2 include:
(Signers of official arguments are in bold.)
- Assembly Speaker Emeritus John A. Pérez
- Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr.
- Allan Zaremberg, President, California Chamber of Commerce
- Dr. Michael Kirst, President, California State Board of Education
- California Democratic Party
- Los Angeles County Democratic Party
- League of Women Voters of California
- California Forward
Major Financial Contributions (Financial contributions to ballot measure campaigns change frequently; for up-to-date campaign contribution information, please check with these websites: votersedge.org, Fair Political Practices Commission and Cal-Access.)
Please note: A coalition is raising money to support both Proposition 1 and Proposition 2. The total contributions shown will be used by both campaigns.
(as of October 11, 2014 total from top contributors: $6,772,015)
- Sean Parker ($1,000,000)
- Brown for Governor 2014 ($875,765)
- California Alliance for Jobs - Rebuild California Committee ($521,250)
- California Hospitals Committee on Issues ($500,000)
- Doris Fisher ($499,000)
- L. John Doerr ($475,000)
- Laborers Pacific Southwest Regional Organizing Coalition - Issues PAC ($400,000)
- Robert Fisher ($400,000)
- John Fisher ($351,000)
- Western Growers Service Corporation ($250,000)
- Northern California Carpenters Regional Council Issues PAC ($250,000)
- Reed Hastings ($250,000)
- California American Council of Engineering Companies Issues Fund ($250,000)
- Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters Issues Committee ($250,000)
- California Farm Bureau Federation ($250,000)
- William Fisher ($250,000)
From the Fair Political Practices Commission:
Educate Our State • www.2bad4kids.org
Opponents of Prop. 2 include:
(Signers of official arguments are in bold.)
- Katherine Welch, Director, Educate Our State
- Hope Salzer, Chapter Director, Educate Our State
- Jennifer Bestor, Research Director, Educate Our State
- Cushon Bell, Secretary, Educate Our State
- Cinnamon O’Neill, Chapter Director, Educate Our State
- Kilty Belt-Vahle, Parent Volunteer, Educate Our State
- Ellen Brown, 2014 candidate for California Treasurer
- California Association of School Business Officials
- Association of California School Administrators
Major Financial Contributions (Financial contributions to ballot measure campaigns change frequently; for up-to-date campaign contribution information, please check with these websites: votersedge.org, Fair Political Practices Commission and Cal-Access.)
No information has been reported by either Voter's Edge or the Fair Political Practices Commission.