California Voters have a very important decision to make on Feb 5, 2008. Californians are voting for the Presidential Candidate, also Propositions.There are seven propositions in the ballot. For community college students the one that stands out is proposition 92.

Proposition 92 is a measure that will make major changes to the state

of the California constitution and to the state laws relating to the

California’s Community Colleges. Proposition 92’s main goals are to change the

current minimum education funding requirement into two separate

account funds, one for the K-12 grade schools and one for all

Community Colleges.

“High school teachers care about what happens to our students after they graduate,” In the site of Yes on Proposition 92 High school teacher Josh Pechthalt, vice-president of United Teachers Los Angeles, says “UTLA supports Proposition 92 because it keeps K-12 funding guarantees in place while ensuring a baseline of support for community colleges. Prop 92 is the Prop 98 for community colleges. It’s a win-win for K-12 and community colleges.”

Opponents of the Proposition 92 are saying that it is not a great time for this proposition, it will lower the cost of units for community colleges but will leave the state short change from revenues, it is not what California needs at the moment. It is unnecessary due to the California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Proposition 92 stands to lower the cost of education fees from

$20.00 to $15.00 per unit. It will also put a hold on states

authority to increase fee levels in the future years.

California has the lowest community college cost per units in the nation. Many feel that this is proposition is unnecessary to the state. According to

the state legislative analyst about one fourth of community college

students pay no education fees at all. They also found that 52 percent of the

full-time California community college students have their fees waived

due to financial need.

The Californian for Fair Education Funding is opposing Proposition 92. They say it will bring in no new funds into the state, but will continue to drain $ 70 million per year from K-14 funding in the future.

They say this will only put the state a giant step backwards on funding for California schools.

Proposition 92 will call for nearly a billion dollars in new spending

in the first three years, but includes no way to pay for this expenditure.

Politicians will have to come up with ways to decide to get the funds

for Proposition 92. Some say that the legislature could get it from the California State Universitys and University of California system.

The University of California newsroom says “Students planning to transfer to a UC or a CSU could end up paying for the proposition 92 in the future”.

Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez said “Proposition 92 while

it is well-intended, it does not help us achieve our goal of ensuring

all students have a chance to go to college,” said Speaker

Nunez. “Prop 92 does nothing to help low-income students with costs at

all and the flawed financing approach to Proposition 92 could

negatively impact students who seek to continue their education at a four year university.”

Brandy Nikaido, a University of California spokesperson said that the UC’s strongly support California’s community colleges. They are an important partner in the state’s higher educational system. The UC depends on the transfer functions for nearly a third of it undergraduate students. Still, all segments of california’s are funded adequately.

The UC board of regents opposed Proposition 92 because the initiative could lock up more of the state budgets, leaving less state general fund money available for discreationary purposes, including programs such as UC and guarantees or mandates.

David A. Sanchez the President of the California Teachers Association says “Proposition 92 is not what it seems it would cause more problem than it could ever solve, the questions before voters is not whether community colleges are important. We are all strong supporters of our Community Colleges system. Instead, the real question is whether California can afford to lock a huge new spending mandate.”