This is going to be a good year for California's community colleges.

Prop 98 funds are coming in higher than originally projected. While much of this funding is one-time money, it still represents additional resources for California’s community college system. The Governor’s May Revise adds to the rosiness, proposing the system receive a 4.31% Cost of Living increase that includes money (1.4%) to finally implement 14 weeks of maternity leave for the K-14 system, an inequity long overdue.

But not all districts will benefit from this increase. Our current funding model, the Student Centered Funding Formula, has a punitive withholding of COLA for districts unable to meet its metrics. These districts, however, will still be required to meet payroll and benefit obligations, pay utilities, and of course, honor the new maternity leave mandate (without funding). When the Legislature provides a COLA, it does so with the understanding that the hard-working employees who serve California’s students deserve to keep pace with the rising cost of living. COLAs exist so that our salaries can better reflect the increased prices of essential expenses like housing, groceries, gasoline, utilities, and healthcare.

A COLA is NOT a bonus for meeting quotas or for a job “well done”.

This is communicating that some community college employees are worth helping, but others are not.
In fact, withholding COLAs inevitably leads to employee layoffs, so the message becomes: “not only are you not worth helping, you are not worth keeping.” When a COLA is withheld, it is equivalent to a budget cut. Districts facing sudden revenue reductions often turn to the most flexible portion of their budgets by laying off contingent and part-time employees. The result is fewer course offerings, reduced student access, and fewer opportunities to support enrollment growth. The number of courses scheduled should be determined by demand and program needs, but inadequate resources prevent that. Over time, this creates a death spiral effect. Fewer classes mean fewer opportunities to capture enrollment growth. Minimal enrollment growth reflects badly on funding metrics; poor funding metrics mean enrollment targets are not met. Not meeting the targets? Another year of COLA withholding. Additional cuts. Year after year. Making it all but impossible for districts to recover. Left unchecked, districts that repeatedly lose COLA funding risk shrinking over time, reducing classes and services until areas of functionality are compromised.

In February, I attended Santa Monica CCD’s Board of Trustees meeting and observed the Board approve the termination of 70 classified professionals and administrators. Here we have one of our flagship districts, serving 40,000 students (the 8th largest district in our system), attempting to find “extra employees” to terminate – I listened to plumbers, painters, and other loyal essential personnel have to beg for their positions. Tutors serving vulnerable student populations, along with students themselves, spoke emotionally about the role these services play in equity and student success. I’m not sure this is what the conceivers of the “student-centered” funding formula were hoping would happen within our system. This is especially difficult to justify in a year with a healthy Prop 98 allocation.

The punitive withholding of COLA in our system needs to stop now.