SACRAMENTO, CA - California seems to be school-bond crazy. Local bonds are being passed at rapid rates and lawmakers are pushing record-breaking state bonds. There are two stories here. First is the huge cost and increased tax burden resulting from these bonds. The second is that these bonds are necessary only because of massive failures of government policies in education and immigration.

At the local level, voters passed 23 school construction bonds, worth more than $1.2 billion, in November 2001 and 50 bonds, worth $3.5 billion, in March 2002. Since local bonds are repaid by increased property taxes, homeowners and other property owners will foot the bill. And whereas prior to 2001 local school bonds needed a two-thirds majority of votes to pass, California now has a 55-percent majority requirement. As opposed to the two-thirds rule, under which around half of proposed bonds passed, in November 2001, 100 percent of the bonds passed and in March 2002, 88 percent passed. Look for school districts to put more and bigger bonds on future ballots and for local property taxes to rise even higher.

At the state level, in 1998 voters passed a $9.2 billion school facilities bond and recently lawmakers placed $25.3 billion in bonds, much of which would go to school facilities, on the November 2002 and March 2004 ballots. If the latter are approved, $34.5 billion in state school bonds will have been passed in six years. For comparison, in 2001-02, the state General Fund budget for K-12 education was $31 billion. California taxpayers will ultimately be responsible for paying back these bond debts plus interest. They should be asking lawmakers why the state is in this predicament.

California’s failed education policies have directly contributed to the classroom shortage, especially the state’s class-size-reduction (CSR) program that reduces K-3 and grade 9 classes to 20 students per classroom. Since its 1996 inception, the state has poured $9 billion into CSR, which has been insufficient to pay for both the added cost of hiring more teachers and staff and the construction of more facilities to house the smaller classes. Hence, districts must ask voters for school-bond construction money.

Class-size reduction, unfortunately, has been an academic bust. A recent report by a research consortium found that after reviewing California’s test scores, “no strong relationship can be inferred between achievement and [class-size reduction].” Even more important, failed government immigration policies have caused California’s skyrocketing student population.

In 2002-03, California will have more than 5.8 million K-12 students, 700,000 more than in 1993-94. Why the dramatic increase? It is due largely to immigration and the higher birth rates in immigrant families. More than a third of K-2 students and one-quarter of all K-12 students have a native language other than English. Both legal and illegal immigration have contributed to the state’s burgeoning student population.

California accounts for a third of the total number of legal immigrants coming into the United States. Additionally, there are at least two million illegal immigrants in California. Absent this tidal wave of new immigrants, there would be no classroom shortage and much less need for expensive bonds and higher taxes.

Instead of blindly approving school bonds, Californians should demand the reform on legal immigration and the elimination of illegal immigration. And here’s a word of caution to the White House and Congress: proposed amnesty for illegals will not help.

Lance Izumi is a Senior Fellow in California Studies at the California-based Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy. He can be reached via email at lizumi@pacificresearch.org.