Senator George Runner
Serving the 17th District which incorporates portions of the Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Ventura and Kern counties.

During the debate for the 2008-2009 State Budget, no issue has caused more public concern than education funding. School districts, teachers and parents criticized the Governor's proposed 10 percent across-the-board budget cuts, which would have included reductions to education funding. This proposal is no longer on the table because the Legislature, including Senate Republicans, is committed to fully maintaining school funding. Yet a little noticed proposal by a non-elected board would effectively reduce the amount of money going toward education because of environmental regulations.
Recently, the Air Resource Board (ARB) adopted a proposal that requires school districts to divert money out of the classroom in order to purchase new school buses in order to reduce diesel emissions. As you may recall, the ARB was given broad authority to regulate emissions under the 2006 California Global Warming Solutions Act, authored by former Speaker Fabian Nunez.

But this proposal, while it claims to improve the environment, carries a hefty price tag, which is especially detrimental to struggling school districts.

The ARB wants school districts to either upgrade or replace older buses in their fleets that do not meet current emission regulations. A retrofit for a bus costs up to $20,000. However, the retrofit is not a viable option for buses that have been in service since the 1970s. Those buses will have to be replaced at a cost of $140,000 per bus.

Many of the buses in use would be too old to retrofit, given that school buses in California are in service for an average of 30 years. It could potentially cost millions for school districts to replace otherwise perfectly usable buses.

School transportation costs fall under the constitutionally guaranteed Proposition 98 funding base for education. This proposal effectively cuts education funding, because schools must devote limited resources that ordinarily would go towards books, teachers and supplies towards replacing perfectly functional school buses instead.

Furthermore, these policy decisions should be under the purview of the Legislature, not the unelected members of the ARB. When AB 32 was debated in the Legislature the Republicans warned about the costly regulations associated with measure. Now it looks as though those costs may adversely affect our struggling schools.

While loud howls reverberated through the Capitol after the Governor proposed cuts to education, not one word has come from my liberal colleagues as this proposal was publicized. Clearly they are choosing the latest environmental causes based on scientifically unproven data over the education of our children.