After publishing our infographic that compares Prop. 30 and Prop. 38, nosotros received the following responses from the campaigns and others knowledgeable virtually the propositions and the issues involved. Complimentary gratuitous to add your own response to our infographic beneath.

Response from Brad Williams, Prop. 38 campaign

  1. The infographic indicates that Prop 38 raises taxes on unmarried filers with incomes above $vii,300 or so. It is truthful that Prop 38 raises tax RATES on taxable income above that amount.  But it doesn't starting time really raising taxes for anyone with incomes beneath roughly $12,000, and many taxpayers won't pay additional taxes until their incomes go far the $30,000 to $50,000 range. The reason is the unused personal, dependent, renters' and other credits allowed under current law, which wipes out all tax liabilities in California for many low and moderate income filers. These filers would keep to pay no taxes even if Prop 38 passes. According to testimony by the Legislative Annotator'south Office, about vi out of the xv meg personal income taxation filers would pay no new taxes under Prop. 38. Nigh of them are in the less-than-$fifty,000 income level.
  2. On the charts showing where the money goes, the EdSource infographic states that thirty% in the first iv years goes to pay off state debt. That is true, but what doesn't come through is that the purpose of the debt payments is to free up money currently being spent from the General Fund for that purpose and so it can be redirected to higher ed and other non-K-12 portions of the budget. It'due south the counterpart to the roughly 50% of revenues in Prop 30 that is used to support non-Prop. 98 programs.

Response from Ballad Kocivar, president of the California State PTA

  1. According to the Legislative Analyst's Office, nether Prop. 38, college taxation rates would upshot in higher revenue enhancement liabilities on roughly 60 percent of country personal income tax returns. Personal, dependent, senior, and other tax credits, among other factors, would keep to eliminate all tax liabilities for many lower-income revenue enhancement filers, fifty-fifty if they have income in a bracket afflicted by the measure's rate increases. Here is the link to the analysis:
  2. What if Prop. 30 fails and Prop. 38 passes?  The budget is not premised on this scenario and many have said that this would be a game changer. The legislature could revise the budget, knowing billions of dollars would be available for schools within a very short time and that bond debt payments would starting time, changing the trigger cut projections considerably.

Response from John Mockler, a supporter of Prop. xxx

  1. Revenues Gained from Proposition 30 also increment Proposition 98 requirements in the 2011-12 year. The K-12 gain is $1.four billion or, put another way, the loss of Proposition xxx means a loss to K-12 schools of $1.4 billion for that year. This is because in California nosotros accrue revenues so that role of revenues for the 2022 calender year are booked to the 2011-12 year.
  2. 2012-13 is a Test 1 and a Maintenance Factor restoration year. That is because, should Proposition 30 pass, Country Full general Fund Revenues increase more than the growth in Personal Income. So Proposition 98 receives 40% of these new revenues and then adds more than than fifty% of the same revenues or more than 90% of all increased revenues.

To get more reports like this one, click here to sign up for EdSource's no-cost daily e-mail on latest developments in education.