Costly Measure J has risks, rewards

You probably have no idea what Measure J is. It’s not the super-polarizing gay marriage proposition (that’s Prop. 8), nor is it the transportation initiative to fund a subway line through the Westside that for-the-love-of-god-please-vote-for (Measure R). Instead, Measure J is a $3.5 billion bond issuance for Los Angeles community colleges to go to various projects within the nine campuses of the LACC district. You’re probably reading this Daily Bruin election special to help you decide how to vote. And boy, Measure J is a tough call.

But lets face it, this election ““ and the voting process in general ““ is basically an internal struggle between the things that directly benefit you and making an altruistic gesture for the things that indirectly affect you, people, or causes that you care about.

So what should we as UCLA students think about $3.5 billion going toward L.A. community colleges?

In support of Measure J, the LACC system is a huge provider for the vocational education and training that equips our workforce and propels our economy.

In 2007, 437 students transferred to UCLA from the nine campuses affected by Measure J, about 13% of all transfer students. Perhaps students transferring in certain majors will have better training and experiences in the new labs and facilities that this measure provides.

The list of projects for the nine campuses is extensive, and it was this specificity that earned the L.A. Times’ endorsement over the other major education initiative on the ballot, Measure Q, a $7 billion bond measure for LAUSD. “Unlike those in Measure Q, the new projects in Measure J are detailed and specific,” noted the L.A. Times’ editorial board.

These projects include structural and technological upgrades, earthquake and fire retrofitting, health and exercise facilities, parking infrastructures, and construction of new libraries, bookstores, and buildings for arts, media, business, science and technology, Green architecture and sustainability assurances permeate the project list.

It’s a huge list, and certain items are especially suggestive of long-term economic growth for L.A., like a language and literacy training institute, a job training and workforce readiness academy at Los Angeles City College, upgrades to a nursing building and development of fire science programs at Los Angeles Harbor College. Projects like these are proposed for every one of the nine campuses, earning support from L.A. County firefighters and the United Nurses Association of California.

The key rationale for voting “no” on Measure J is simple: $3.5 billion is a lot of money.

We have a budget crisis in California, and while the UC and CSU systems are having to raise tuition in order to offset decreases in state funding, the California Community College system is still state funded, and CCC fees still hover at an enviable $20 per unit.

The UC Regents uncharacteristically got involved with community college ballot initiatives last year when they opposed Proposition 92, which would have reduced CCC fees from $20 to $15.

The move was unprecedented, since the Regents rarely get involved with legislation that does not directly affect them, but their logic was understandable. With both systems relying on the state for support, why should CCCs reduce tuition while the UC’s tuition has almost doubled in the past six years?

It’s a bit strange then that the Regents, and even Chancellor Block, have been silent on Measure J. It looks like opposing Prop. 92 was a one-time deal and not a precedent set for weighing-in on California’s higher education initiatives.

While Measure J is clearly different ““ it’s countywide, not statewide, affecting projects, not tuition ““ the money still has to come from somewhere, and it’s a lot of money. Also, Prop. 92 was defeated in a pre-recession economic climate. Surely the Regents’ “fixed pie” economic rationale still applies.

So speaking to the purely selfish part of your voting mentality, you could vote not from a standpoint of fiscal conservatism. It’s a lot of money that could be spent on other important and deserving areas of public higher education, like UCLA, or less selfishly, helping Los Angeles save the jobs and homes that so many are projected to lose.

On the other hand, you can indulge your selfishness by voting yes on the belief that this will have a net positive outcome in the long run. At least the money is going to higher education. Let the LACCs get this round, it’ll be the UC’s turn soon.

Have something more to say about Measure J? Then e-mail Aikins at [email protected]. Send general comments to [email protected].