Town Square

Post a New Topic

California Lottery

Original post made by Anne on Mar 14, 2009

Whatever happened to the lottery money that was supposed to add millions to the schools? Has any of that money gone back to the schools at all?

Comments (10)

Posted by Stacey, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Mar 14, 2009 at 11:38 pm

Anne asked: "Has any of that money gone back to the schools at all?"

Yes, but it's a mere drop in the State education funding bucket. There's a State website that breaks down the percentages of revenue sources and shows this.


Posted by you're kidding right?, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Mar 15, 2009 at 8:27 am

That money replaced general fund money and as Stacey mentions is a drop in a bucket.

Furthermore, gambling for education is questionable. If you really want to help education buy the library a book.


Posted by Jill, a resident of Carlton Oaks
on Mar 15, 2009 at 9:29 am

Additionally, there was a story in the LA Times last fall, I think (I can't find it now), about the fact that lottery revenue is down, just like every other income source for the state.

(And I must say that I agree with "you're kidding right?" that funding schools with lottery money is a questionable practice at best.)


Posted by Michelle, a resident of Donlon Elementary School
on Mar 16, 2009 at 7:39 am

California Lottery
Schools & Kids, posted by Anne, a resident of the Pleasanton Meadows neighborhood, on Mar 14, 2009 at 11:03 pm
Whatever happened to the lottery money that was supposed to add millions to the schools? Has any of that money gone back to the schools at all?


Report Objectionable Content


Posted by Michelle, a resident of Donlon Elementary School
on Mar 16, 2009 at 7:44 am

RESPONSE TO: California Lottery
Schools & Kids, posted by Anne, a resident of the Pleasanton Meadows neighborhood, on Mar 14, 2009 at 11:03 pm

The Lottery works like this: An example: Say the lottery made 40,000 dollars. The state government would give the 40,000 to education directly and then in the background take the 40,0000 out of the school budget and moved it to other programs. The schools get nothing. It is a cheat to the schools and a terrible loop hole.

Report Objectionable Content


Posted by Bruce, a resident of Pleasanton Heights
on Mar 16, 2009 at 9:24 am

All the money raised by the lottery wss earmarked for education. The Honorable Willie Brown then realized that the initiative for the lottery didn't require the lottery to be additional funding for education and promptly used what should have been used for education to fund more give away programs to buy votes.

After all, that is what politics is all about. Getting reelected at all costs. Screw the taxpayers, keep them in office.


Posted by GC, a resident of Del Prado
on Mar 16, 2009 at 4:19 pm

I was talking about this very subject this weekend with some friends, and they brought up a good questions. Since the state decided that what ever the dollar amount the lottery contributed to the schools would than affect the amount that the state will contribute (yes quite the loophole) Can this be done with the parcel tax. So if we all give this extra tax money can the state than deduct from thier funding what we are giving to our district? Or can we be assured that this tax will be in addition to the state money?


Posted by Bob, a resident of Downtown
on Mar 16, 2009 at 10:13 pm

This is written just like the proposed parcel tax. While the districts says no money will be used for administrative raises, it frees other money to be used for raises. Same type of loophole.


Posted by Mflanagin, a resident of Donlon Elementary School
on Mar 17, 2009 at 5:00 pm

Not true Bob. See the bottom of page two of the resolution. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES.... can't me more clear than that. No loophole there.

Web Link


Posted by Bob, a resident of Downtown
on Mar 17, 2009 at 5:50 pm

Mflanagin: Glad you found the loophole. It says none of the parcel tax money can go directly to administration raises BUT did not restrict any of the other $120M or so of the district funding from going to raises. The district was even asked to put in a clause that there would be no administrative raises during the term of the parcel tax. Since the administration was involved in writing the parcel tax resolution, they wanted no such clause.

This is just like a family with two incomes and the deal is that none of one of the family members income will be used directly for going out to eat. Since the mortgage, utilities, and everything else is paid for by both incomes, you could still go out to eat as long as you did not cash the check at the restaurant.

This is just like the lottery. The state has to pay a certain amount towards schools in total. They now have suplemental income from the lottery so they redirect school funds they would have had to pay for without the lottery and give it to other sources. The lottery ended up not being additive but rather substitutive in income.


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Anti-fracking folks rail against railroads
By Tim Hunt | 34 comments | 941 views

Moneyball, the Sequel: Billy Beane for President!
By Tom Cushing | 6 comments | 684 views

Spedowfski Announces run for Livermore City Council
By Roz Rogoff | 1 comment | 672 views