Pasadena Unified stands to lose about $34.5 million a year if voters reject Proposition 3. The district's chief business officer delivered that figure to the Board of Education at its Thursday, Oct. 22, meeting.

The board voted 7-0 to endorse the statewide ballot measure, which would make permanent the higher income tax rates on high earners that currently fund a large share of California's school budgets. The vote and dollar figure were first reported by Pasadena Now.

Chief Business Officer Arik Avanesyans pegged the district's share of the Education Protection Account (EPA) at $34,451,000, based on the district's state funding formula calculator. The EPA was created under Proposition 30 to receive revenue from the higher rates. Avanesyans said the amount fluctuates annually, driven mainly by state capital gains tax collections.

"For us it would be devastating," Avanesyans said of losing the money, adding that it is unrestricted funding.

He was responding to Trustee Kimberly Kenne, who said she did not think the proposition spelled out its impact on Pasadena Unified. Kenne noted that United Teachers of Pasadena had cited a lower figure of $27 million. A union representative had told the board earlier that the district could lose as much as $27 million a year if the rates expire without Proposition 3.

For most districts, EPA money offsets other state aid under the funding formula, according to the California Department of Education.

Trustee McKenzie, who made the motion to approve Resolution 2912, said the measure preserves existing revenue.

"These would not be new tax dollars. These are dollars that are already being paid," McKenzie said. Trustee Scott Harden seconded. No members of the public spoke on the item.

Proposition 3 would maintain higher income tax rates on earnings above about $371,000 for single filers and $742,000 for joint filers at 2025 levels, according to the attorney general's ballot summary. The state analyst's office estimates the measure would preserve $5 billion to $15 billion a year in state income tax revenue, with roughly 40 percent going to schools and community colleges.

Opponents argue in the state voter guide that the measure turns taxes voters were told would be temporary into permanent ones. The argument against it is signed by leaders of the California Taxpayers Association, the Family Business Association of California and the California Hispanic Chambers of Commerce. A rebuttal signed by Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association President Jon Coupal and two others says the measure would cost taxpayers up to $15 billion a year.

Voting on Proposition 3 ends Nov. 3.