School of Public Affairs Annual California Policy Options Online
Posted on March 18, 2009

California Policy Options 2009 (Cover design by Stan Paul)

The UCLA School of Public Affairs and Lewis Center annual publication, California Policy Options is now available online. Each year, the publication is edited by Daniel J.B. Mitchell, professor of public policy and management, emeritus, and covers a range of timely California issues. Experts from across the UCLA campus contribute research from the California budget and education to transportation and crime.

California Policy Options 2009 (Download Pdf)

2009 Edition Introduction by Daniel J.B. Mitchell, Editor

With its economy in decline, California faces a tough year in 2009. In the first chapter of this edition of California Policy Options, Christopher Thornberg points to the bursting of the real estate bubble and its many negative repercussions on the state and national economies. Thornberg was one of the first forecasters to point to the real estate bust as likely to induce a recession.

The economic downturn has highlighted the difficulties in state governance as the legislature wrestles with the fiscal consequences of falling tax revenue. In November 2008, an initiative supported by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger narrowly passed that will remove legislative redistricting after the 2010 Census from the hands of the legislature. In our second chapter, William B. Parent discusses redistricting reform and voter behavior in California more generally. Daniel J.B. Mitchell in the third chapter then describes the record delay in passing the 2008-09 state budget, a budget which quickly fell apart after its enactment in mid-September 2008. He points to a diffuse gubernatorial agenda as part of the problem that state has had in dealing with the budget crisis. Mitchell notes the parallel to the 1978 passage of Prop 13, the initiative that drastically cut local property taxes and required a two-thirds vote for tax increases. In 1978, political leaders – particularly the governor – also seemed unable to focus on what was then the critical issue of state and local finance: property tax relief.

Education is the largest public program in California. Many observers view education as a path to economic advancement and labor-market success. Chapter four by Sophie Fanelli, John Rogers, and Melanie Bertrand takes up the issue of how well the state’s K-12 system is performing. The authors note that when broken down by race and ethnicity, California schools do not perform well for any group. Within the groups, however, minority-population schools are especially likely to be disadvantaged by such factors as lower-quality teachers.

California’s higher education systems have long been taken as a model for the public sector. But as Werner Z. Hirsch points out in the fifth chapter, the state’s fiscal system can not support higher education as envisioned in the old Master Plan. Other needs and constraints tend to crowd out higher education as a state priority. Hirsch notes that as other states have faced similar dilemmas, they have moved to a more privatized version of public higher education – particular in the form of the so-called Michigan model which involves both higher fees but also high financial aid and access for state residents.

At the local level, the public looks to government to provide basic services such as transportation, street repair, and crime suppression. In the sixth chapter, Brian D. Taylor, Hiroyuki Iseki, Mark A. Miller, and Michael Smart report the results of a survey of state public transit users. They find that the most important determinant of user satisfaction with a transit stop or station is frequent, reliable service in an environment of personal safety. The physical characteristics of that stop or station are a lesser concern of users. For those traveling on foot, however, sidewalk conditions are important. As Donald Shoup points out in the seventh chapter, local governments – pressed by restricted budgets – may have difficulty in financing timely sidewalk maintenance. Shoup, using the example of the City of Los Angeles, notes that homeowner responsibility for sidewalk conditions, linked to sales of homes, could provide a financing model.

Crime control often suggests direct police presence. However, technology can substitute for such an in-person presence though the use of video camera surveillance. In the eighth chapter, Jennifer King, Deirdre K. Mulligan, and Steven Raphael provide an analysis of the San Francisco experience with such surveillance. The authors distinguish between property crime and violent crime. Evidence suggests that video surveillance does reduce the former in the vicinity of the camera, but not the latter.

In the ninth and final chapter, Daniel J.B. Mitchell looks at survey data on unionization in California. California has experienced de-unionization along with the rest of the U.S., but the state’s absolute unionization rate is notably higher than the national average, largely due to high unionization in the public sector. Over time, the mix of workers within California unions has tilted towards a higher percentage in government employment. Mitchell reviews recent union developments in a variety of California industries. Included are data from a survey undertaken by the Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., with the support of the UCLA Institute for Research on Labor and Employment. While federal law largely pre-empts private sector union regulation by the state, agriculture and the public sector are subject to state control.

Finally, I would like to extend my thanks to UCLA student Patricia Lynn Porter and Stan Paul, Director of Communications for the UCLA School of Public Affairs, for their assistance in the production of this edition.

Previous California Policy Options