Education Plan Draws Praise, a Few Grumbles

Gov. George Deukmejian’s education budget drew lofty praise from many school officials Thursday, but some community college officials say they are disappointed with the size of the increase proposed for their system.

Education expenditures account for 56% of Deukmejian’s overall budget--up from 49.2% for education in 1982-83, the last budget prepared by former Gov. Edmund G. Brown Jr.

The $18.9 billion that the state plans to spend for education in the 1985-86 school year represents an increase of more than $5 billion over the 1982-83 total.

“No matter how he got there, the facts are that (Deukmejian) has backed up his pledge to make education his top budget priority,” said Bill Honig, state superintendent of public instruction.

Elementary and secondary school officials and four-year university spokesmen, whose systems will receive double-digit increases, alsogenerally expressed unreserved praise for the governor’s spending proposals, but spokesmen from the community colleges, whose increase will be smaller, were less than enthusiastic.

“I’m generally disappointed,” said Gerald Hayward, chancellor of the California community college system.

Orange County community college officials expressed similar feelings.

“We still come in fourth in the education system, behind the University of California, California State University, and K-12 (kindergarten through high school),” said William Schreiber, executive assistant to the chancellor at Saddleback College.

The community college budget will get an increase of about $140 million, but that amount includes an estimated $36 million in lottery money. With the lottery money included, the budget shows an increase of about 8.7% for community colleges. If the lottery money is not included, the increase is about 6.5%, according to the budget figures.

Next year, the state will spend an estimated $3,065 per child in the public schools, an amount that should bring California up to the national average in school spending, state Supt. Honig said.

Professors at the University of California will receive 8.8% salary raises, and those at the 19 California State University campuses will get a 10.5% boost, enough to keep both groups at or ahead of comparable university systems in other states. Fees for students will be held steady under the governor’s plan.

Increases Praised

For the nine University of California campuses, the budget includes everything from more money for scholarships and lab equipment to new or expanded facilities for engineering programs at UCLA, Irvine and San Diego and a law school addition at UCLA.

In Orange County, most educators praised the governor’s education budget and the proposed increases.

Robert Peterson, superintendent of the Orange County Department of Education, said the governor’s increase for elementary and secondary education “is certainly commendable” and “is going to help us recover from losses over the past decade.”

Ed Dundon, superintendent of the 37,000-student Garden Grove Unified School District, the largest in Orange County, said he is very much pleased with the amounts earmarked for elementary and secondary education. He said, however, that his comments are tempered by the fact that individual districts do not know yet exactly how much they will receive.

“I have a very positive reaction” to the governor’s proposed budget, he said, “but I don’t think we should overreact until we know what the exact (district money) numbers are. But it certainly sounds very good, and I don’t know how we could be anything but positive.”

Jack Peltason, chancellor of UC Irvine, said that the governor’s budget “is very gratifying.”

“I think the governor’s budget makes it abundantly clear that he is committed to restoring the strength of education in California,” Peltason said.

“After 10 years of underfunding, the governor’s proposal to increase revenue for the University of California is reversing that trend because this would be the second year of a significant budget increase. California once was regarded as the leader in national education, and with this sort of funding, I think we are once more moving in that direction.”

Some Orange County community college officials, however, were less than happy with the relatively meager increase given their institutions.

Schreiber, of Saddleback College, said his understanding was that about 3% of the 8.7% increase the governor said he would ive community colleges would be from lottery money. “That’s a little bit disappointing to us,” he said, noting that the intent of the lottery initiative was that its money would not be used as a substitute for state appropriations.

But Schreiber said Saddleback College administrators are extremely pleased that the governor’s budget calls for funding all $6.9 million of the college’s proposed construction next year, including expansion of the north campus in Irvine.

Robert Matthew, vice chancellor at Santa Ana College, said “it’s kind of hard to evaluate” the governor’s proposal “since it’s my understanding that the increase (to community colleges) includes state lottery money.”

The lottery, which voters approved in November, is scheduled to be launched this year, and all its profits are supposed to go to education.

David Brownell, chancellor of Coast Community College District, said he was happy that the budget “gives a reasonable floor,” but he expressed hope that the Legislature would increase the amount for community colleges.

Not surprisingly, the budget received the most favorable comments from officials from the elementary, secondary and university systems.

“As far as I can see, the University of California got everything it asked for,” said William Pickens, budget analyst for the state Commission on Postsecondary Education. The California State system did nearly as well, he added.

Community Colleges Chancellor Hayward did have some good things to say about the budget, however. “The budget includes some positive items,” he said, citing a $32-million fund to aid districts such as Los Angeles and Compton, which are suffering severe enrollment drops.

Deukmejian also added $3 million to help more minority students at two-year colleges transfer to the University of California or California State University.

“But there’s no money to catch up for the tremendous losses we’ve suffered,” Hayward added. “We have to view this as just the beginning of the budget battle.”

Los Angeles community college officials were even more disturbed.

“As far as we’re concerned, this budget doesn’t show the colleges are a No. 1 priority,” said Norm Schneider, spokesman for the Los Angeles community colleges.

“Compared to UC and CSU, it’s neither fair nor adequate. And we think our need is greater than theirs,” he added. “A 6% increase will barely keep our heads above water.”

Schneider said Los Angeles college officials have not had a chance to project how much money would come to the nine campuses. The state aid is distributed based on enrollment, and since 1982, the Los Angeles colleges have lost more than 25% of their students.

Money for Education Governor Deukmejian’s proposed budget would raise money for all education programs in California by 10.8%, from $17.0 billion to $18.8 billion. Education accounts for 56% of the total proposed $33.6-billion state budget. Education Money--General Fund and Local Revenues (In thousands of dollars)

Proposed % Increase 1983-84 1984-85 1985-86 from ‘84-85 Category Allocation Allocation Allocation to ‘85-86 Univ. of California $1,110,012 $1,475,147 $1,634,333 12.2% CalState 947,995 1,151,552 1,266,950 10.0% Comm. Colleges 1,416,689 1,614,475 1,754,490 8.7% K-12 10,983,000 12,376,400 13,693,600 10.6% Other Costs 114,712 494,986 609,492 23.1% TOTAL 14,572,408 17,044,470 18,878,855 10.8%