00001.tif

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Contact Us

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content This dissertation has been „ , . 6 4— 6 235 microfilmed exactly as received AVERY, Paul Joubert, 1924- BREWER, Ervin E arle, 1923- MILLER, Charles E arl Frederick, 1926- GROWTH AND WEALTH IN 412 SELECTED CALIFORNIA SCHOOL DISTRICTS, 1945-46 TO 1960-61. Authors received degrees at University of Southern California, Ed.D., 1963 Education, administration University M icrofilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, M ichigan GROWTH AND WEALTH IN 412 SELECTED CALIFORNIA SCHOOL DISTRICTS 1945-46 TO 1960-61 A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the School of Education The University of Southern California In P artial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Education by Paul Joubert Avery Ervin E arle Brewer Charles E arl Frederick Miller August, 1963 This dissertation, written under the direction of the Chairman of the candidate’s Guidance Committee and approved by all members of the Committee, has been presented to and accepted by the Faculty of the School of Education in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of D octor of Education. D ate. .. 1963..................................................... D ean G uidance C om m ittee TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF T A B L E S ................................................................................................... PART I. THE FORMULATION AND DEFINITION OF THE PROBLEM Introduction Purpose of the study Importance of the study Delimitations of the study Definition of term s used Organization of the rem ainder of the dissertation PART II. FINANCIAL FACTORS OF GROWTH Chapter I. PROCEDURE IN SELECTION OF GROWTH DISTRICTS.................................................................................. Compilation of total data Selection of growth districts Summary of the chapter II. GROWTH IN CALIFORNIA....................................................... Growth on a state-wide basis Growth by county unit Growth by geographical areas Summary of the chapter HI. ASSESSED VALUATION AND CHANGE OF WEALTH PER PUPIL.................................................................................. The concept of assessed valuation and wealth Wealth on a state-wide basis Chapter Page Wealth by county unit Wealth by geographic area Summary of the chapter IV. RELATIONSHIPS OF GROWTH TO WEALTH CH A N G E........................................................................................ 70 Comparisons of all districts Comparisons of growth districts Correlation of growth to wealth change, state-wide Correlation of growth to wealth change by county unit Correlations of growth and wealth change by geographic area Other comparative methods Summary of the chapter V. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS: PART I I ................................. 88 Findings concerning growth Findings concerning assessed valuation and wealth per pupil Findings concerning relationships of growth to wealth change PART HI. A STUDY OF SELECTED ECONOMIC FACTORS RELATED TO THE FINANCIAL SUPPORT OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN CALIFORNIA VI. THE PROBLEM AND ITS DEVELOPMENT.................... 94 Introduction Statement of purpose Importance of the study Sources of information in the literature Organization of the remainder of P art HI of the study i i i Chapter P a g e VII. THE PUBLIC SCHOOL REVENUE STRUCTURE. . . 106 VIII. IX. Public school revenue sources among the states Public school revenue sources in California Taxable wealth and some selected principles of taxation M easures of taxable wealth Wealth-owned: taxes on property Wealth as income: taxes on incomes Comparison of wealth-owned and wealth as income Summary of the chapter PROPERTY TAXATION, PROPERTY VALUATION, AND LAND-USE.................................... Property Taxation in California Constitutional and statutory provisions governing property taxation Provisions governing property tax administration Property Tax Administration and the Basis for Property Valuation The Concept and Meaning of Property Value Summary of the chapter JUSTIFICATION OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE AND SAMPLE OBTAINED............................................... Establishment of C riteria for the Problem Construction of the questionnaire Section I of the questionnaire Distribution of the questionnaire Tabulation and treatm ent of the data Summary of the chapter i v 126 143 Chapter P a g e X. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS: PART I I I ................................. What particular land-use changes occurred among the growth districts selected for study over the period 1945-46 through 1960 - 6 1 ? Does the appearance or absence of these selected economic factors--land-use changes--among the growth districts studied account for the discerned up ward or downward trends in assessed valuation per ADA? Could a "land-use model" be obtained from the investigation that might be utilized for predictive purposes, for the benefit of current and future growth districts in California? PART IV. A STUDY OF SELECTED SOCIOLOGI CAL FACTORS RELATED TO THE FINANCIAL SUPPORT OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN CALIFORNIA XI. CHARACTERISTICS OF GROWTH 1945 TO 1962 . . Introduction Migration Importance of migration History of migration in California Negro m igration to California Employment Patterns, 1945 to 1962 Fluctuations within the employment divisions, 1945 to I960 National employment trends 150 . 172 v Chapter P a g e XII. XIII. Urban Growth C haracteristics in urban growth Description of a metropolitan area Summary of the chapter IMPLICATIONS OF URBAN GROWTH, 1945 TO 1962 ......................................................................................... Introduction Social Aspects of Urban Growth Social-area analysis Case studies of urban communities Economic and governmental concerns with urban growth Proposed Solutions to Metropolitan Problems Review of the Toronto plan Review of California proposals for metropolitan areas Legislative interest in metropolitan area problems The urbanized school district in California Summary of the chapter PROCEDURE AND TREATMENT OF THE DATA: PART I V .................................................................................... Introduction Gathering of Data and Procedure Gathering of data Procedure Construction of Section II of the Questionnaire Results of the interviews v i 191 208 Chapter P a g e XIV. Verification of the questionnaire Critique of the questionnaire Utilization of the Questionnaire Selection of respondents Designation of the largest-grow th districts Designation of the fastest-growth districts A ssessed valuation per pupil Return of the questionnaire Summary of the chapter TREATMENT OF THE DATA ...................................... Introduction Dwelling Unit Construction, 1945 to 1962 Analysis of the total responses Trends in dwelling unit construction, 1945 to 1962 The largest-grow th districts The fastest-growth districts Favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil Summary of the analysis of items 25, 26, and 27 Dwelling Unit Occupancy Analysis of total responses Residents occupying single-dwelling units Residents occupying apartment-type dwellings Residents renting or leasing Summary of the analysis of item s 28, 29, and 30 220 v i i Size and Condition of Dwelling Units Analysis of the total responses Residents occupying 1, 500 or more square feet Residents occupying 1, 000 or less square feet Residents occupying substandard units Summary of the analysis of items 31, 3 2 , and 33 Industrialization of Growth School Districts Analysis of the total responses Residents living in partially industrialized areas Working residents subject to recurring layoffs, etc. Female residents engaged in full-time occupations Summary of the analysis of items 34, 35, and 36 Personal Income of Residents Analysis of the total responses Fam ilies earning $10, 000 or more per year Fam ilies earning $6, 000 per year or less Summary of the analysis of items 37 and 38 Educational-Occupational Level of Adult Residents Analysis of the total responses Adults in occupations associated with a college background Adults in occupations associated with a trade-tech training Chapter Adults in occupations associated with no special academic training Summary df the analysis of items 39, 40, and 41 Racial and Age Composition of Growth School Districts Analysis of total responses Negro residents in the residential population Bilingual residents in the population Residents age fifty or more in the population Summary of the analysis of items 42, 43, and 44 Residential Transiency in Growth Districts Analysis of total response Residents in districts three years or less Residents in district ten years or m ore Summary of the analysis of items 45 and 46 Student Transiency in Growth School Districts Analysis of the total responses Student transiency in growth school districts Percentage of students enrolled directly from out»of-state Summary of the analysis of items 47 and 48 XV. SUMMARY OF PART XV......................................................... Introduction Findings from the Literature Migration Employment and industry Urban growth P age 293 i x Chapter XVI. XVII. Findings from the Questionnaire Results of the investigation PART V. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLU SIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS SUMMARY OF FIN D IN G S......................................................... Procedures and Findings: P art II Procedure utilized in P a rt II Findings concerning growth A ssessed valuation and wealth per pupil Realtionship of growth to wealth change Procedures and Findings: P art III Procedure utilized in P a rt III Findings concerning specific economic factors Procedures and Findings: P art IV Procedure utilized in P art IV Findings concerning migration Employment and industry Urban growth Findings from the questionnaire SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMEND ATIONS ............................................................................................. Introduction Conclusions Recommendations Use of this study Property taxation P age 301 318 x Chapter P a ge Problems of urbanization Administrative preparation BIBLIOGRAPHY.............................................................................................................. 330 APPENDIXES..................................................................................................................... 340 APPENDIX A ....................................................................................................... 341 APPENDIX B ....................................................................................................... 358 APPENDIX C ....................................................................................................... 360 APPENDIX D ....................................................................................................... 362 x i LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. California Average Daily Attendance *•••••••••• 24 2. Proportion of Average Daily Attendance by Type of D istrict • • • • • • . . . ......................................................... 25 3. Amount of Growth by Type of D istrict • • • ....................... 26 4. Percentage of Total Growth by Type of D istrict . . . 27 5. Percentage of Increase in Average Daily Attendance by Type of D istrict ............................. 28 6. Mean Growth P er Year by Type of D istrict . . . . . . 29 7. Amount and Proportion of Average Daily Attendance in Growth Districts 31 8. Amount of Growth in Growth D istricts, and Proportion of Total 31 9. Mean Growth P er Year by Type of D istrict .••••. 32 10. Growth in the Fifteen Most-Growth Counties ................ 35 11. Growth in the Fifteen Least-Growth C o u n tie s................ 36 12. Changes in Rank Order of Fifteen Most-Growth Counties ..................................................... 38 13. Changes in Rank O rder of Fifteen Least-Growth Counties ............................... 39 14. Rank Order Listing of Counties Exceeding State Average Percentage of Increase in Average Daily Attendance ................. 41 x i i Table P age 15. Counties in Order of Percentage of Total County- Average Daily Attendance in Growth Districts . . 43 16. Number of Growth Districts by Type in Major Areas of G ro w th ................. 46 17. Analysis of Growth Districts by Area .................... 47 18. State-Wide A ssessed Valuation by Type of District (In Thousands of D o lla rs).................................. 52 19. Amount and Percentage of Increase in Assessed Valuation (In Thousands of D o lla r s ) ................. 53 20. State-Wide AV/ADA by Type of District . . . . . . . . 54 21. Amount and Percentage of Change in AV/ADA by Type of D i s t r i c t ........................................................... 55 22. A ssessed Valuations for Fifteen Most-Growth Counties (In Thousands of Dollars) .. . . .. . . .. 57 23. A ssessed Valuations for Fifteen Least-Growth Counties (In Thousands of Dollars) .••••••••• 58 24. Changes in AV/ADA of Fifteen Most-Growth Counties (Expressed in Percentage of Change). . . 60 25. Changes in AV/ADA of Fifteen Least-Growth Counties (Expressed in Percentage of Change) . . 61 26. Assessed Valuations of Growth Districts by Area (In Thousands of Dollars) .................. 63 27. AV/ADA and Percentage of Change by A r e a ........... 64 28. Percentage of Change, State-Wide, All Districts . . 66 x i i i T able P age 29. Percentage of Change, State-Wide, of Growth D istricts ................................... 67 -30. Correlative Relationships Between Growth and Wealth C h a n g e ............................ 76 31. Basic Data on Distribution, Growth D is tric ts ................ 78 32. Correlation of Growth and Wealth Change by County U n i t ..................... 79 33. Correlation by Geographic A r e a s ........................................... 81 34. Correlation by Amount of Growth, State-Wide . . . . 82 35. Distribution of Mean Wealth Change by Growth R a n k -O rd e r.............................................. 84 36. Distribution of Mean ADA Change by Wealth Change R a n k -O rd e r........................ 85 37. Percentage of School Money from Local and County, State and Federal Sources, 1929-30 to 1962-63 ......................................................................................... 108 38. Percentage of General Fund Revenues of California School D istricts, by Source 1950-51 to 1956-57, AH D is tric ts ........................................110 39. Percentage of Aggregate Public School Revenues, Receipts from Property Taxes, 1946-47 to 1960-61 113 40. Summary of the Responses by Growth Districts to the Questionnaire, 130 Elementary D istricts, 33 High School D istricts, 25 Unified School D istricts, Total of 188 D is tric ts ..........................152 x i v Table Page 41. Summary of Responses by Growth Districts by Percentage of Dand-Use Category "Absent" or "Present" ..................................................................................... 153 42. Summary of Chi-Squares Between Change in Land-Use Category and Change in A ssessed Valuation P er ADA ........................................ 158 43. Summary of Chi-Squares Between Change in Land-Use Category and Change in A ssessed Valuation P er A D A ............................................. 164 44. Extreme Differences Among Growth School D i s t r i c t s .......................................................... 285 45. Identifying Features of the Fastest-Growth Districts ................................................................... 287 46. Identifying Features of the Largest-Growth Districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289 47. Identifying Features of the Districts Which Maintained a Favorable Ratio of A ssessed Valuation P er Pupil .......................................... 291 x v PART I THE FORMULATION AND DEFINITION OF THE PROBLEM Introduction One of many by-products of a great population surge is an increase in the number of children to be educated by the public schools. From the beginning of the public school systems in the United States through the end of World War II the population in the various states of this country has increased, but, with a few excep tions, at a relatively steady pace. California*s growth in population during this period of time was greater than many other states, but still maintained its steadiness. At the conclusion of World War II many economic, geo graphic, and sociological factors combined to cause the beginning of a population growth in the state at an increasingly rapid pace. This resulted in California assuming the position in the fall of 1962 as the most populous state in the Union. With this population growth naturally came a correlative increase in school enrollment at the various levels of the educational system. 2 With an increased number of pupils must come increased total costs of their education. This, combined with the various fluc tuations of the cost of living, produces ever-increasing financial problems for the legislators of the state, and down the line to the local school district governing boards and adm inistrators. Purpose of the study The purpose of the study was to investigate the phenome non of growth in California during the fifteen-year period following the end of World War II, and to determine economic and sociological changes coincident with that growth. Data were gathered on the pupil attendance and assessed valuations of districts throughout the state over this growth period. These data were analyzed and certain districts were selected to study in greater detail. Particular attention was given to the changes in the amount of assessed valuation per pupil in average daily attend ance to determine what happened to this ratio during the growth period. The districts selected as maximum growth districts were then queried by questionnaire as to certain economic and sociological changes which occurred during the same period of time. The specific questions investigated were these: 4 1. Does the appearance or absence of specific economic factors coincide with upward or downward trends in assessed valuation per pupil in average daily attendance? 2. Does the appearance or absence of certain sociological factors coincide with upward or downward trends in assessed valuation per pupil in average daily attendance ? 3. Is there evidence that the presence of certain combined socio•economic factors coincide with a trend of upward or downward assessed valuation per pupil in average daily attend ance ? Importance of the study If the process of growth in pupil population in the state were completed, or there was even strong evidence that it would be slowed down or stopped in the near future, there would be only academic interest in the historical study of what has happened during this fifteen-year period. Since no such evidence exists, those persons charged with the education of the children of the state must prepare for a continuation of the process for an indefinite period. Success in the educational process is highly dependent upon adequate financing for the present and highly accurate planning for the future. No set of rules has yet been devised by which one can accurately predict all the vagaries of human nature, such as where man will choose to live, and when and how many children he will produce. The best planning for financing public schools is dependent upon educated guesses on some of these m atters. Guesses may become more educated, however, by a careful analysis of what has happened and an intelligent application of this analysis in planning for the future. In short, it is hoped that the information gathered herein will be of value in the predictive process upon which many districts will embark as they plan to finance their future growth. Delimitations of the study The magnitude of the problem undertaken in this study required that certain delimitations be applied to reduce its com plexity. 1. The study was limited to districts within the state of California. Z. Assessm ent practices, as evidenced by assigned modification factors, were not taken into con sideration in the determination of wealth. 6 3. All school districts studied were reconstructed to correspond throughout the growth period with their grade level, organization, and geographical location as they existed in the fiscal year 1960-61. 4. Only elementary, high school, and unified districts were treated in this study. 5. A rbitrary limits were set on the number of pupils in average daily attendance and the total percentage of growth to be attained in the selection of growth districts. 6. Certain estimations were necessary in the reconstruction process of districts which became unionized or unified during the period studied. 7. No assumption was made that the categories appearing in the questionnaire represent all the economic and sociological factors which may bear upon growth and change in wealth. Definition of term s used Adjustment of assessed valuation. --The unit rate of 7 financial support of school districts from state funds is dependent in part upon certain federal and local incomes to these districts. The application of these two sources of income, converted to assessed valuation equivalents, is term ed adjustment of assessed valuation. Average daily attendance (ADA). --Many state subventions to a school district are dependent upon the average number of pupils who were in attendance each day during a given period of time in that district. This, rather than enrollment, is the common m easure of the pupil population in the state of California. A ssessed valuation (AV). -"As used herein, this term refers to the taxable wealth, the monetary value for tax purposes that is placed upon all property in the school district by the county assessor and the State Board of Equalization. A ssessed valuation per average daily attendance (AV/ ADA). --This term is used throughout the study to represent the product obtained by dividing the total assessed valuation of the dis trict by the number of pupils in average daily attendance. Elementary school district. --In this state a district which educates children from their first entry into school, either kindergarten or first grade, until their completion of the eighth grade is term ed an elementary school district. Fiscal year. --As opposed to a school year, which normally includes only the nine calendar months of the year that a school is in session, the term fiscal year includes the full year from July first through the thirtieth day of June of the succeeding calendar year. High school district. --A district which educates children entering the ninth grade until they have completed either the twelfth or fourteenth grade is term ed a high school district. Modification of assessed valuation. --The unit rate of state support to school districts is also dependent upon the assess* ment practices followed by the assessors of the several counties. These practices are not necessarily uniform, and the assessed valua tion of a district may be modified by a factor assigned by the State Board of Equalization in an attempt to equalize the load on the tax payer caused by these assessm ent practices. This factor, when applied to the assessed valuation of a school district, is term ed the modification factor. Unified school district. --D istricts which combine the education of their elementary and high school pupils into one district organization, and under one governing board, are term ed unified school districts. These districts may initially enroll pupils in either the kindergarten or first grade, and continue their education through the twelfth or fourteenth grade. Union school district. --When used as a descriptive adjective with an elementary school district, this term implies that the boundaries of the district now enclose territo ries which in prior years were in more than one elementary district. As used with high school districts, this term indicates that the district educates the secondary pupils who reside in more than one elementary district. Organization of the rem ainder of the dissertation The remainder of the dissertation consists of four parts (each subdivided into chapters), a bibliography, and appendixes. P a rt II, conducted by one researcher, contains a study of the financial factors associated with growth in California, and the attendant changes in wealth. Growth, changes in wealth, and rela tionships between the two are approached from a state-wide aspect, by county unit, and by geographical area. Statistical applications are made to determine relationships between growth and change in wealth. Certain patterns in both variables are defined, and statisti cal inferences are drawn. This part concludes with a summary of findings in this area. A background of selected economic factors, along with statistical presentations of the results of the questionnaire, is 10 presented in P art III, conducted by the second research er. These economic factors are analyzed and statistical inferences drawn to point out relationships between them and the changes in wealth in the various districts. This part also concludes with a summary of find ings in the economic area. The relationship of sociological factors to growth and change in wealth are studied in P a rt IV, conducted by the third researcher. These factors are interrelated and analyzed, and statistical applications made. A summary of the sociological find ings is presented at the conclusion of this part. The interrelationships between P arts X I, HI, and IV are presented in P a rt V, along with a listing of the significant findings in all parts. A summary, the conclusions, and recommendations is also included herein. Each of the aforementioned parts contains the procedure followed by each of the three researchers. Information in P arts III and IV, from which statistical inferences are drawn, is based upon combinations of the information contained in P a rt II, and the results of a joint questionnaire submitted by the second and third researcher. PART II FINANCIAL, FACTORS OF GROWTH CH A PTER I PROCEDURE IN SELECTION OF GROWTH DISTRICTS Compilation of total data In order to select most accurately the districts to be studied for growth, economic, and sociological patterns, and at the same time to obtain the vital growth information on the whole state, a compilation of the growth and wealth data on all districts in the state was undertaken. It was determined that information by level of district organization would be of value, hence districts were organ* ized into a pattern which would perm it analysis of data by level in addition to county, area, and state-wide. To obtain uniformity in average daily attendance report ing throughout the state and over the various years involved, it was necessary to make certain guide lines. The average daily attendance for the seventh and eighth grades and for the thirteenth and four teenth grades presented a problem because of the variation of their placement in district organizational patterns throughout the state. Since the choice of the type of district to educate their seventh and 12 13 eighth grade pupils is a matter of local determination by the voters of the district, and has no m aterial effect upon their ability to sup port this education, it was decided to include seventh and eighth grade attendance in the elementary districts of residence without regard to whether their education was conducted by the high school district or the elementary district. It was further realized that there are two basic organ izational patterns in secondary school districts, some districts educating pupils from ninth through twelfth grades, and others educating pupils from the ninth through the fourteenth grades. Because the validity of the basic data is dependent upon the mainte nance of continuity of grade level in each district throughout the period, and since a minimum of estimation was desired in the recon struction of districts, it was determined that the organizational pattern in use by the secondary district in the fiscal year 1945-46 would be continued throughout all the years studied. There were fourteen junior college districts in the state in 1945-46, and this number increased to thirty districts in the fiscal year 1960-61. Since the number of junior college districts more than doubled during that period of time, and accurate informa tion is available only on the original fourteen, it was decided to eliminate junior college districts from the study. 14 The difference in organizational patterns in unified districts with respect to grades thirteen and fourteen was also a m atter of concern. The same general principles were applied to these districts as to high school districts. Only if the organizational pattern in the fiscal year 1945-46 was kindergarten through four teenth grade was this pattern continued throughout the study. As in the case of secondary districts mentioned above, if grades thirteen and fourteen were added to the grade span during the fifteen-year study, it was necessary to remove the thirteenth and fourteenth grade average daily attendance from the total for each year. Because of the unionization, unification, lapsations, and transfers which occurred during the fifteen-year period of the study, it was further necessary to re-create all districts into the organiza tional pattern appearing in the fiscal year 1960-61. This necessi tated tracing through the organizational pattern changes of all dis tricts to determine that the area and grade level structure were reported the same for each of the five-year periods. Since no his torical information is available on minor boundary changes which have doubtless occurred in many districts, these changes were ignored in the re-creation of district organizational patterns. The updating previously described was accomplished from information gathered from the apportionment reports published 15 by the State Department of Education, directories of school districts published through the years by County Superintendents of Schools, and individual inquiries in certain cases. This process also reduced the number of districts at the elementary level from 2, 248 in 1945 to 1, 316 in 1961, the number of high school districts from 260 to 221, and increased the number of unified districts from 46 to 119, This produced a total of 1,656 school districts which were studied. All joint districts were considered to be wholly in the county of jurisdiction for both average daily attendance and assessed valuation. In the few cases of change in county control during the period studied they were considered to have been under the jurisdic tion of the 1961 county throughout the entire period. Cognizance was taken of the fact that state reports on average daily attendance in the earlier years did not include kinder garten attendance, and that special accounting for emergency average daily attendance entered the picture at varying tim es. However, the changes in both these practices were made on a state-wide basis, and would not effect the prim ary comparisons between districts whose organizational patterns were kept constant. Average daily attendance for adults was deliberately omitted from the data for all high school and unified districts in the 16 belief that this would not affect the results, and would have no direct bearing on the ability of the districts to support themselves. In the compilation of the basic data, assessed valuations for all districts were expressed in thousands of dollars, rounded off from the original figures. A perusal of the assessed valuation data showed that this practice would produce a maximum e rro r of one- tenth of 1 per cent in districts of the lowest total valuation, and a maximum e rro r of one hundredth of 1 per cent in over 90 per cent of the districts. Since modification and adjustment of assessed valuation affect only the apportionments made by the state, and not the local ability of the district, these factors were not considered when study ing the wealth of districts. Adequate historical information on the segregation of the valuation of a district into secured and unsecured valuation is not available throughout many of the years covered by the study. The lack of this information was not considered to be of great enough significance to affect the results of the study, and, hence, all valua tions expressed represent the total of secured and unsecured valua tions. The variations in practices of county assessors in the establishment of a relationship of true m arket value to the assessed 17 valuation for tax purposes is recognized. However, this decrease over the years in the ratio used by assessors has been offset by an increase in the true m arket value of taxable property. For this reason, no attempt was made in this study to adjust valuations for either of these factors. A more detailed analysis of these practices and their effect on the wealth of a school district will be made in P a rt III. A complication in the compilation of totals in valuations arose from the fact that the assessed valuations of high school dis tricts in most cases are also reflected in the assessed valuations of their component elementary districts. (Some elementary districts still exist throughout the state which are not in any high school d istric t,) In order to obtain the greatest continuity, total valuations of the state, counties, and areas are a combination of the valuations of elementary and unified districts, without regard to the valuations of the high school districts therein. Rather than attempt to tabulate the year-by-year change in average daily attendance and assessed valuation, four specific years were chosen for analysis. The fiscal years of 1945-46, 1950- 51, 1955-56, and 1960-61 were chosen to delineate three five-year periods in the total fifteen-year interval from the end of World War H through the last year for which total information was available. 18 Following the guidelines described above, information was assembled by level within county structure on the assessed valuation and average daily attendance of all districts in the state. County control figures on each item were run on an adding machine to insure accuracy of keypunching. This information was then key-* punched, verified, and listed by a data processing installation. The cards thus prepared were placed in a computer and the following information was obtained on all districts in the state: 1. A ssessed valuation per pupil for each of the four years, 2. Percentage of increase in average daily attendance during each of the five-year periods, 3. Percentage of change in assessed valuation during each of the five-year periods, 4. Percentage of change in assessed valuation per pupil during each of the five-year periods, 5. Percentage of increase in average daily attendance during the fifteen-year period, 6. Percentage of change in assessed valuation during the total period, 19 7. Percentage of change in assessed valuation per pupil during the total period, and 8. Determination of the qualifications of each district to be selected as a growth district for further study. Many difficulties were encountered in this compilation of the basic data. Among the most prominent was the separation of the average daily attendance of seventh and eighth grades from some of the high school districts and their apportionment to the proper elementary districts. It was also necessary to remove the average daily attendance of grades thirteen and fourteen from those high school districts who added these grades to their structure during the period studied. It was not always readily discernible just which year these two grades were added. In the cases of districts which became unified during the growth period, it was often difficult to determine which high school districts educated their secondary pupils before unification. After determination of the districts, it was then necessary to apply a ratio of high school average daily attendance to total average daily attend ance of prior years in order to estimate closely the number of high school pupils who would have attended the unified district during those years before it was unified. 20 One problem commonly encountered was that of district name change from one year to the next. It was necessary to inquire by letter to the appropriate county superintendent of schools in some cases to determine what happened to a certain district which appar ently disappeared from the records from one fiscal year to the next. A corollary problem encountered was that of a district being changed from one county of jurisdiction to another, and, in some cases, back to the original county again. These problems, however, were eventually all resolved by reso rt to letters and telephone calls to districts and county offices. Certain inaccuracies are inherent in any reconstruction from historical data. In the case of the compilation of the basic data in this study, the inaccuracies caused by inadequate records in prior years were of such sm all volume that the total purpose of the study was unaffected. As is shown in the next section, the resultant selection of growth districts produced a thoroughly adequate answer to the question of location and amount of growth in the state. This, ultimately, was the real purpose of the compilation of data on all districts. Selection of growth districts D istricts were selected as growth districts if they met both of the following criteria: 21 1. Their total percentage of increase in average daily attendance during the fifteen-year period was a minimum of 100 per cent. 2. Their average daily attendance for the fiscal year 1960-61 was a minimum of 900 for elementary districts, 1,000 for high school districts, and 1, 500 for unified districts. This process resulted in the selection of 261 elementary districts, ninety-three high school districts, and fifty-eight unified districts, making a state-wide total of 421 from the original 1,649 operational districts in the fiscal year 1960-61. The remaining seven districts from the state total of 1,656 were suspended, and nonoperational in that year. County totals were obtained in both average daily attend ance and assessed valuations, county assessed valuation per pupil was computed for each type, and percentage of change in average daily attendance and assessed valuation per pupil in each county was recorded. On the basis of geographic location of each growth dis trict, five areas of maximum concentration of growth were located, and information on all districts in these areas was compiled in the same manner as county totals. 22 Summary of the chapter This chapter outlines in detail the methods used to com pile the total data on growth in the state of California during the period studied, and the methods of selection of growth districts for further study are delineated. The criteria selected for determination of growth districts are also noted herein. The next chapter is devoted to a detailed study of growth in average daily attendance in the state, state-wide, by county unit, and by selected areas. C H A P T E R II GROWTH IN CALIFORNIA Growth on a state*»wide basis In order to present a broad framework for study of the individual growth districts, the complete data on the state as a whole were presented. This gave a context in which further study of counties, areas, and individual districts might be made. Table 1 presents the reported average daily attendance by district level for the four critical years studied. It should be noted that the average daily attendance for elementary districts represents the pupils in average daily attendance in elementary districts, not the total pupils attending elementary grades. Pupils in the elementary grades of unified districts are reported as a part of the average daily attendance of those districts. The same principle applies to high school average daily attendance in that the attendance in high school districts does not represent the total number of high school pupils in the state during that year. It is interesting to note at this point that the proportion of 23 24 T A B L E 1 CALIFORNIA AVERAGE DAILY ATTENDANCE Type 1945-46 1950-51 1955-56 1960-61 Elementary 551,279 855, 791 1, 266, 790 1, 759,486 High School 195, 637 277,562 352,223 559,665 Unified 380,476 584, 288 797,145 1, 051, 658 Total 1,127,392 1,717,641 2, 416, 158 3, 370,809 pupils attending districts of each type remained fairly constant during the fifteen-year period* Table 2 presents this proportion for each year studied on the total state attendance credited to each of the three types of district organization. It will also be noted that the increase in attendance in elementary districts of 3. 3 per cent is offset by a decrease in high school districts of only 0.8 per cent, but a decrease in unified districts of 2. 5 per cent. One organizational change which came into effect on July 1, 1961, the fiscal year immediately following the last year studied, radically changes these percentages. This change was the unification of the Los Angeles City Schools, which combined the state*s largest high school district with the state*s largest elementary 25 T A B L E 2 PROPORTION OF AVERAGE DAILY ATTENDANCE BY TYPE OF DISTRICT Type 1945-46 1950-51 1955-56 1960-61 Elementary 48.9 49.8 52.4 52. 2 High School 17.4 16.2 14.6 16. 6 Unified 33.7 34. 0 33. 0 31. 2 district into one unified district. This action placed more pupils in unified districts than in either of the other two types. Another way of presentation of the picture of California growth is by amount of growth during each of the five-year periods, and over the total fifteen-year period. This information is presented in Table 3 by organizational type and by state total. The first period delineated in this table, and used in subsequent tables and statements, represents the five-year period from the fiscal years 1945-46 to 1950-51. The second period covers from the fiscal years 1950-51 to 1955-56, while the third period covers from 1955-56 to 1960-61. The total period figures indicate the fifteen-year period from the fiscal years 1945-46 to 1960-61. Study of this table will show that the rate of growth has 26 T A B L E 3 AMOUNT OF GROWTH BY TYPE OF DISTRICT Type F irst Period Second Period Third Period Total Period Elementary 304, 512 410,999 492, 696 1,208, 207 High School 81, 925 74, 661 207,442 364, 028 Unified 203,812 212, 857 254,513 671, 182 Total 590, 249 698,517 954, 651 2, 243, 417 generally increased from one period to the next. The one exception to this is noted in the high school figure, where the growth in the second period was less than that in the first period. However, a compensating fact appears in the third period for these same districts when their growth increased almost threefold over the prior period. This ties quite closely to the fact that children born during the post war "baby boom" years reached high school age during the period between 1956 to 1961. As a corollary to Table 2 which presents the percentage of total average daily attendance by type of district, it is of interest to study Table 4, which presents the percentage of total growth by type of district during the same periods. The percentage of total 27 T A B L E 4 PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL GROWTH BY TYPE OF DISTRICT Type F irst Period Second Period Third Period Total Period Elementary 51. 6 58.8 51. 6 53.8 High School 13.9 10. 7 21.7 16. 2 Unified 34.5 30.5 26.7 30. 0 growth in each type very closely approaches its percentage of total average daily attendance during the fifteen-year period. Data of interest may be presented in another way by com puting the percentage of increase in average daily attendance by type of district for each of the four periods of time. Table 5 percentages indicate the ratio of the increase in average daily attendance during the period to the average daily attendance at the beginning of each period. It should be understood that the decreasing percentages found in most types are a function of the increased divisors used to obtain them. A m atter of interest in the data of Table 5 is that the total percentage of increase in average daily attendance experienced in elementary districts was approximately 9. 5 per cent greater than 28 T A B L E 5 PERCENTAGE OF INCREASE IN AVERAGE DAILY ATTENDANCE BY TYPE OF DISTRICT Type F irst Period Second Period Third Period Total Period Elementary 55. 2 48. 0 38.9 219.2 High School 41.9 26.9 58.9 186. 1 Unified 53.6 36.4 31.9 176.4 Total 52.4 40. 7 39. 5 199. 0 the state total, while high school districts experienced 12.9 and unified districts 22.6 per cent less than the total of the state. Data concerning growth throughout the state may further be expressed in the average growth per year during each of the three five-year periods, and the average growth per year over the whole fifteen-year period. This data is presented in Table 6. It will be noted that in all types of districts this average growth per year increased during each of the five-year periods with the single excep tion of high school districts during the second period. The process of selection of growth districts was de scribed in Chapter I. To answer the question of whether this selec tion resulted in districts which really represent the growth in the 29 T A B L E 6 MEAN GROWTH PER YEAR BY TYPE OF DISTRICT Type F irst Second Third Total Period Period Period Period Elementary 60,902 82, 200 98, 539 80, 547 High School 16, 385 14,932 41,488 24, 269 Unified 40, 762 42,571 50,903 44, 745 Total 118, 049 139,703 190,930 149,561 state, information was tabulated on the 412 selected growth districts and compared to the total average daily attendance and growth in the state over equal periods of time. In number of districts, the growth represents almost exactly one-fourth of the districts in the state. However, from the standpoint of average daily attendance, the growth districts had varying percentages of the pupils of the state during the fifteen-year period. This percentage varied from 51. 5 per cent of the high school pupils in the year 1950-51 to 82, 1 per cent of the ele mentary school pupils in the year 1960-61. The complete tabulation of the amount of average daily attendance in growth districts during the four critical years, and the proportion their average daily attendance represents of the total 30 average daily attendance of the state during the same four years is presented in Table 7. It will be noted from Table 7 that in each type of district the percentage of the total state average daily attendance in that type increased from one reporting year to the next. Another means of comparison used to determine the validity of the growth district selection is to compare the amount of growth in these growth districts with the amount of growth in the state over the same periods and in the same type of districts. To make this comparison the appropriate data is shown in Table 8, It will be noted from this table that the amount of growth in the state which occurred in the growth districts varies from 63. 4 per cent to 90,7 per cent, with the second period from 1950 to 1955 showing the highest over-all percentage. Further comparison can be made by study of the average growth per year during each of the five-year periods studied. As in the state as a whole, the average yearly growth increased during each five-year period, as is shown in Table 9. The average yearly growth by type of district among the growth districts, however, maintained a consistent increase over the three periods in all three types of districts, and in the state as a whole. 31 T A B L E 7 AMOUNT AND PROPORTION OF AVERAGE DAILY ATTENDANCE IN GROWTH DISTRICTS Type 1945-46 (Per Cent) 1950-51 (Per Cent) 1955-56 (Per Cent) 1960-61 (Per Cent) Elementary 389,328 (70.6) 626,196 (73.2) 997,473 (78.7) 1, 444, 555 (82.1) High School 91,060 (46.5) 142,973 (51.5) 205,324 (58. 3) 355, 814 (63. 6) Unified 208, 860 (54.9) 345,715 (59.2) 532,437 (66.8) 752, 732 (71.6) Total 689,248 (61.1) 1, 114, 884 (64. 9) 1, 735, 234 (71.8) 2, 553, 101 (75.7) TABLE 8 AMOUNT OF GROWTH IN GROWTH DISTRICTS, AND PROPORTION OF TOTAL Type F irst Period (Per Cent) Second Period (Per Cent) Third Period (Per Cent) Total Period (Per Cent) Elementary 236,868 371,277 447,082 1, 055, 227 (77.8) (90. 3) (90.7) (87.3) High School 51,813 62,351 150,490 264,754 (63.4) (83.5) (72.5) (72.7) Unified 136, 885 186,722 220,295 543,872 (67.2) (87.7) (86.6) (81. 0) 425,636 620,350 817,867 1,863,853 (72. 1) (88.8) (85.7) (83. 1) 32 T A B L E 9 MEAN GROWTH PER YEAR BY TYPE OF DISTRICT Type F irst Period Second Period Third Period Total Period Elementary 47, 373 74, 255 89, 416 70, 348 High School 10, 383 12, 470 30,098 17,670 Unified 27, 371 37, 344 44, 059 36, 258 T otal 85, 127 124, 070 163, 573 124, 257 Growth by county unit A common unit of m easurem ent of a portion of the state of California is the county. County boundaries were established largely for political and governmental reasons, and serve no real relation to school district boundaries. The county administrative educational unit, however, does have certain relationships and responsibilities to the school districts of all types within the county, and the county unit of m easurem ent is a common one in many educa tional studies. In the past few years there has been much considera tion by educators and legislators of various forms of equalization of state aid to school districts on a county basis. These county equal ization proposals are based upon separate county-wide taxes for each 33 county, and with no direct connection to any other particular county. It is not the purpose of this study to delve into the theories or purposes of county-wide equalization or county-wide taxes, but presentation of growth information by county summary offers a con venient way of breaking down state-wide information into small units which can be compared. For the information which follows, county boundaries are assumed to be the boundaries of the combined school districts which are under the administrative jurisdiction of the county superintendent of schools of that county, and not necessarily the actual geographic county boundaries. Because of many joint districts, that is, those whose boundaries encompass portions of two or more counties, any county totals of assessed valuation in this study will not necessarily agree with assessed valuation figures published by other than educa tional sources. Because of extreme variations in physical size and in density of population among the counties of the state, only the fifteen counties with the most growth and the fifteen counties with the least growth are considered at this time. The remaining twenty-eight in the middle range of growth are studied only in certain aspects. It should be noted that two counties, Sierra and Plum as, are joined into one unified district, and are considered as one district and one 34 county. Two other counties, Mariposa and San Francisco, contain only one unified district each. Alpine County is a county-wide ele mentary district, educating its high school pupils outside the county on contract. Table 10 presents the distribution of growth in the fifteen counties whose growth was the greatest in the state, along with their percentage of increase in average daily attendance during the fifteen- year period. Also is shown each county*s percentage of the total state average daily attendance during the 1960-61 fiscal year, and an accumulated percentage of this state total. This table indicates that Los Angeles County has the p re ponderance of growth in the state, approximately five times more than its nearest competitor, but its percentage of increase is not nearly so high as many other counties. These fifteen most-growth counties comprise 85. 7 per cent of the average daily attendance of the state during the fiscal year 1960-61. At the other end of the scale is presented the fifteen counties of least growth in the state. It will be noted that none of these counties contain any large cities, and from a geographical standpoint, are located largely in the northern, mountainous areas of California. The information on these counties is presented in Table 11. These fifteen counties, together, represent only 35 T A B L E 10 GROWTH IN T H E F IF T E E N M O ST-G RO W TH COUNTIES Rank County Amount of Growth P er Cent of Increase Total ADA Accumu lated P e r Cent 1 Los Angeles 771,017 184. 1 34.4 34.4 2 San Diego 167, 229 295.7 7. 5 41.9 3 Orange 152, 010 623.8 6.8 48. 7 4 Santa Clara 132,107 437.9 5.9 54.6 5 Alameda 109,014 141. 2 4. 9 59. 5 6 S ac r am ento 94, 328 341. 5 4.2 63. 7 7 San Bernardino 80, 953 232. 1 3.6 67. 3 8 San Mateo 78, 506 428. 0 3. 5 70.8 9 Contra Costa 73,962 205. 6 3. 3 74. 1 10 Fresno 61,024 163. 7 2.7 76.8 11 Riverside 46,490 216. 5 2. 1 78.9 12 Kern 44, 097 142.9 2. 0 80.9 13 San Francisco 43, 264 77. 2 1.9 82.8 14 Ventura 34,226 255. 3 1. 5 84. 3 15 San Joaquin 32,069 134.8 1.4 85. 7 T o ta l 1 ,9 2 0 ,2 9 6 36 T A B L E 11 GROWTH IN TH E F IF T E E N LE A ST-G R O W TH COUNTIES Rank County Amount of Growth P e r Cent of Increas e Total ADA Accumu lated P er Cent 1 Alpine 32 100. 0 0. 001 0. 001 2 Mono 269 136. 5 0. 012 0. 013 3 Mariposa 375 67. 0 0. 017 0. 030 4 Lassen 666 23. 1 0. 030 0. 060 5 Modoc 842 80. 2 0. 038 0. 098 6 Amador 961 81.4 0. 043 0. 141 7 Calaveras 987 81.6 0. 044 0. 185 8 Colusa 1, 352 87. 3 0. 060 0. 245 9 Nevada 1, 404 56. 5 0. 063 0. 308 10 Lake 1, 424 102. 0 0. 063 0. 371 11 T rinity 1, 529 401. 3 0. 068 0.439 12 San Benito 1, 560 82. 2 0. 070 0. 509 13 Sierra-Plum as 1, 576 83.6 0.070 0. 579 14 Inyo 1, 584 123. 1 0. 071 0. 650 15 Tuolumne 1, 714 110.4 0.076 0. 728 T o ta l 16, 275 37 three-quarters of 1 per cent of the average daily attendance of the state during the fiscal year 1960-61. Combining the data presented in Tables 10 and 11 one reaches the conclusion that the thirty counties listed in these two categories represent just over 86 per cent of the average daily attend ance distributed over the remaining twenty-seven counties. The question of shifts of centers of population within the state due to growth over the fifteen-year period studied may be p a r tially answered by an analysis of the changes in rank-order of county average daily attendance. These changes are presented in Tables 12 and 13, which list the changes in rank-order of the top fifteen growth counties and the lowest fifteen counties in growth, along with their rank-order of average daily attendance in both 1945-46 and 1960-61. The data on most-growth counties points out that only one county, Ventura, moved into the top fifteen counties over the fifteen- year period. Only one county, San Bernardino, retained its relative rank during the same period of time. The greatest upward change in rank was the movement of Orange County from twelfth to fourth place, and the greatest downward change was the movement of five steps by both Fresno and San Francisco counties. The data on least-growth counties indicate three which maintained their same rank. No rank change either upward or 38 T A B L E 12 CHANGES IN RANK O RDER O F F IF T E E N M O ST-G RO W TH COUNTIES County- Rank in Amount of Growth Rank in ADA 1945-46 Rank in ADA 1960-61 Los Angeles 1 1 1 San Diego 2 3 2 Orange 3 12 4 Santa Clara 4 9 5 Alameda 5 2 3 Sacramento 6 10 6 San Bernardino 7 7 7 San Mateo 8 15 11 Contra Costa 9 6 8 F resno 10 5 10 Riverside 11 14 13 Kern 12 8 12 San Francisco 13 4 9 Ventura 14 18 15 San Joaquin 15 13 14 39 T A B L E 13 CHANGES IN RANK ORDER O F F IF T E E N LE A ST -G R O W T H COUNTIES County Rank in Amount of Growth Rank in ADA 1945-46 Rank in ADA 1960-61 Alpine 57 57 57 Mono 56 56 56 Mariposa 55 54 55 Lassen 54 39 44 Modoc 53 52 54 Amador 52 51 52 Calaveras 51 50 51 Colusa 50 47 48 Nevada 49 41 43 Lake 48 48 50 T rinity 47 55 53 San Benito 46 43 46 Sierra-Plum as 45 44 45 Inyo 44 49 49 Tuolumne 43 42 41 40 downward of more than three steps is evident, with the one exception of Lassen County's drop of five positions. On the prem ise that the percentage of increase in average daily attendance over the growth period is a more adequate indicator of "growing pains" than the actual increase in pupil population, data were gathered to point out which counties suffered this increase in percentage in excess of the state average. Nineteen counties so qualified, and are listed in rank order of percentage of increase. Nine of these nineteen are found to be in the middle twenty-seven counties in rank of amount of growth. One is in the list of least- growth counties, and the remaining nine are in the list of m ost- growth counties. It will be noted from Table 14, which presents this data, that six of the fifteen top-growth counties as listed in Table 10 do not appear. These counties, all below the state average in p e r centage of increase, are Los Angeles, Alameda, Fresno, Kern, San Francisco, and San Joaquin. Appendix A shows the distribution of growth districts throughout the counties of the state by type of district. Also is shown the total number of districts by type, the number of districts over 100 per cent growth, and the number of districts under 100 per cent growth. Differences between number of growth districts and number of districts over 100 per cent growth are accounted for by the 41 T A B L E 14 RANK ORDER LISTING OF COUNTIES EXCEEDING STATE AVERAGE PERCENTAGE OF INCREASE IN AVERAGE DAILY ATTENDANCE Rank County Percentage of Increase 1 Orange 623.8 2 Del Norte 540. 0 3 Santa Clara 437.9 4 San Mateo 405.8 5 Trinity 401. 3 6 Sacramento 341. 5 7 Marin 322. 4 8 San Diego 295.7 9 El Dorado 283. 3 10 Ventura 255. 3 11 Santa B arbara 238. 6 12 San Bernardino 232. 1 13 Shasta 228.6 14 Humboldt 227.8 15 Yolo 221. 7 16 Riverside 216. 5 17 Napa 208. 2 18 Contra Costa 205.6 19 Monterey 203.4 State Average 199.0 42 districts in each type which did not reach the minimum average daily attendance in 1960-61 to qualify as growth districts, even though their percentage of growth was adequate to qualify them. The number of districts which qualify as growth districts is not nearly so important as the total percentage of average daily attendance within the counties which is found in the growth districts. Table 15 presents the counties which contained growth districts, and the percentage of their total average daily attendance in 1960-61 so contained. These counties are arranged in rank order of percentage of their average daily attendance in growth districts. It will be noted from the same table that only forty-four counties contained growth districts of the total of fifty-seven. Five of the forty-four counties contained only one growth district, and five others contained only two growth districts. None of the four counties containing county-wide districts, Alpine, Mariposa, San Francisco, and Sierra-Plum as, qualified as growth counties because the single districts contained therein did not qualify. San Francisco did not qualify because of amount of growth, and the other three because of total size. Growth by geographical areas Examination and comparison of the county data presented 43 T A B L E 15 COUNTIES IN ORDER OF PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL COUNTY AVERAGE DAILY ATTENDANCE IN GROWTH DISTRICTS Rank County P e r Cent Rank County P er Cent 1 Orange 97. 0 23 Sonoma 65. 6 2 Sacramento 96.7 24 El Dorado 60. 2 3 Santa Clara 96.6 25 Placer 59.3 4 San Diego 96. 5 26 Stanislaus 59. 2 5 San Mateo 96. 1 27 Napa 59. 1 6 Marin 88. 2 28 Glenn 53. 5 7 Riverside 85. 5 29 Madera 53. 1 8 San Bernardino 85. 3 30 Merced 50. 3 9 Monterey 84. 3 31 Butte 49.8 10 Yuba 82. 3 32 Alameda 47.6 11 San Joaquin 80. 9 33 Sutter 47. 4 12 Los Angeles 80. 7 34 Tehama 45. 0 13 Santa Barbara 79.6 35 Del Norte 44. 7 14 Santa Cruz 78. 1 36 Inyo 42. 6 15 Contra Costa 76.9 37 Kings 41. 3 16 V entura 74. 5 38 Yolo 39.7 17 Shasta 68.3 39 Im perial 38. 5 18 Mendocino 68. 2 40 San Benito 37.5 19 San Luis Obispo 67. 1 41 Solano 32. 1 20 Fresno 66. 8 42 Tulare 31. 1 21 Humboldt 66. 3 43 Nevada 28.8 22 Kern 66.1 44 Siskiyou 14. 0 44 reveals the apparent grouping of growth districts into geographic areas. Therefore, the growth districts were plotted on an outline map of the state, which is presented as Appendix B. This grouping by geographic location, combined with certain known geographic facts of the state, produced five areas of concentration of these growth districts. The first of these areas is termed the North Coastal Area, and includes the growth districts in Del Norte, Humboldt, Mendocino, and the northern part of Sonoma counties. These dis tricts have common geographic factors of being in close proximity to the main coastal highway north from San Francisco, U. S. Route 101, and being located largely in slightly mountainous terrain whose economy is lumbering, ranching, and dairy farming. There are no large cities in this area, and the average daily attendance of all the districts is relatively small. The second area discerned is best described as the North Mountain Area, and generally extends southward from the Oregon border between the mountain ranges on either side of U. S. Route 99 to the beginning of the Central Valley. This area is largely mountainous ranch land, with an economy of farming and lumbering. There are no large cities and no school districts with a large number of pupils in average daily attendance. 45 Extending 30 to 50 miles inland from the Pacific Ocean around the San Francisco and Monterey Bay areas is the area termed the San Francisco Bay A rea. It is generally oval in shape and has the diversified economy of large cities and general suburban areas. Many large school districts, including the cities of San Francisco and Oakland, are located herein. The fourth area is the largest of the five in term s of square miles, extending southward from the Feather River down the Central Valley to the Tehachapi Mountains south of Bakersfield. There are several isolated large cities connected by flat plains of rich farm land, and is almost exclusively agricultural. The cities have large school districts, but the population is relatively sparse in the rural areas. The greatest concentration of population and growth dis tricts is found in the area term ed the South Coast Area. This area extends 40 to 50 miles inland from the coast south from San Euis Obispo to the border of Mexico. It is largely urban and suburban, encompassing many large cities, but with small areas of rural de velopment in the northern part of the area. In general, these area boundaries do not follow county boundaries, but in nearly all cases enclose all the growth districts within given counties. Five small areas of growth in the state are 46 not included in these five major areas. They are the growth districts around Lake Tahoe, Bishop, China Lake, Needles, and El Centro. The five growth areas are in no way balanced with each other in number of districts of average daily attendance. Table 16 shows the number of districts by type in each of the areas, and Table 17 gives the total amount of growth during the fifteen-year period, the percentage of increase in average daily attendance, and the propor tion of the total average daily attendance of the state located in these areas. TABLE 16 NUMBER OF GROWTH DISTRICTS BY TYPE IN MAJOR AREAS OF GROWTH Area Elementary High School Unified North Coastal 8 4 2 North Mountain 11 3 0 San Francisco Bay 82 28 11 Central Valley 39 19 8 South Coastal 116 37 34 47 T A B L E 17 ANALYSIS O F GROWTH DISTRICTS BY A R E A Area Total Growth P er Cent of ADA Increase P er Cent of State Total Growth North Coastal 18,949 231. 4 0.8 North Mountain 16,902 185.8 0.7 San Francisco Bay 428,593 386. 2 19. 1 Central Valley 244,169 216. 8 10.9 South Coastal 1, 142, 807 257. 6 50.9 Summary of the chapter This chapter is concerned with a detailed study of the growth in average daily attendance in the State of California from the fiscal year 1945-46 through the fiscal year 1960-61. The growth for the entire state for this period is studied first, pointing out that the growth has been constantly increasing in pace throughout the state, but faster in some areas than in others, with minor differences being evident between various types of districts. Validity of the selection process of growth districts is further reinforced by the information that the 412 growth districts contained over 83 per cent of the growth in the state. Study of growth by county unit indicates that 85 per cent 48 of the growth in the state was concentrated in fifteen counties, with the other 15 per cent distributed among the remaining forty-one counties. Five geographic areas are outlined, which contained the major portion of the growth in the state. Slightly over half of the total growth in the state is found in one of these areas, the South Coastal Area, encompassing basically the coastal areas of Santa B arbara, Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego counties. The next chapter is concerned with an analysis of the assessed valuation and wealth per pupil throughout the state. This will be treated state-wide, by county unit, and by geographic ar^a. C H A PT E R HI ASSESSED VALUATION AND CHANGE OF WEALTH PER PUPIL The concept of assessed valuation and wealth By far the greatest source of local revenue for school districts of ail types is the ad valorem tax on property, both real and personal. This property is assigned a monetary valuation by the County A ssessor each year. This valuation is commonly called the assessed valuation, and is usually based upon a fixed percentage of the market value of the property. The tax rate is then determined either by statute or vote to be a certain number of cents or dollars on each one hundred dollars of assessed valuation. The amount of money for a taxing agency which a certain rate will raise therefore depends upon how much assessed valuation of property the tax rate is levied. The cost of operating a school district for a given fiscal year is usually in direct proportion to the number of pupils to be educated that year. Under present financing plans in California, 49 50 slightly over one-half of this cost is met through taxes levied by the local school districts. The relationship between the number of pupils and the total amount of assessed valuation for tax purposes is, there fore, a vital factor in school finance. The common term for this relationship is assessed valuation per pupil in average daily attend ance in the district. This relationship will be expressed hereafter as AV/ADA. To give an example of the importance of this ratio, in two school districts, each having 1,000 pupils in average daily attend ance, the assessed valuation of the first district is twenty million dollars, and that of the second district is five million dollars. Dividing the total assessed valuation by the number of pupils produces the amount of assessed valuation behind each pupil for tax purposes. In the first district, this produces twenty thousand dollars, while in the second it produces only five thousand dollars. Any given tax rate, therefore, will produce four times more revenue in the first district than in the second. Conversely, the second district must levy a tax rate four times larg er than the first in order to produce the same amount of money to educate each child. It has been a basic principle in California that the state should attempt to equalize this discrepancy in the method used to apportion the state money for education to districts. The second 51 district in our example would receive a greater amount of money from the state for each child than would the first district. No attempt is made here to explain the detail of how these rates of support by the state are derived, but only to point out that the concept of AV/ADA affects both the local tax rate and the amount of money received from the state. It will be rem em bered that the term "wealth" in the introduction was defined as the ability of a school district to support itself through local taxation. In all further discussion in this part of the study, this term "wealth" will be used to indicate assessed valuation per pupil, and "change in wealth" to indicate a change in the assessed valuation per pupil over a given period of time. Wealth on a state-wide basis As a parallel approach to that used in the study of growth in California in the preceding chapter, the study of assessed valuation and AV/ADA is now presented. The assessed valuation of California has increased over the fifteen-year period about commensurate with the increase in population and, hence, average daily attendance. Table 18 presents the total assessed valuation of the school districts in California during the four fiscal years studied by type of district. It will be noted that the total listed for the state is 52 T A B L E 18 STATE-WIDE ASSESSED VALUATION BY TYPE OF DISTRICT (In Thousands of Dollars) Type 1945-46 1950-51 1955-56 1960-61 Elementary High School Unified $5, 392, 837 5, 380, 916 3, 139, 038 $ 8, 801, 822 8, 773, 799 4,844, 044 $13, 035, 588 13, 032, 799 6,953, 149 $19, 515, 660 19,468,789 10, 065, 960 Total $8, 531, 875 $13, 645, 856 $19, 988, 737 $29,581,620 the sum of the assessed valuations of the elementary and unified dis tricts. It is immediately apparent that the assessed valuation of all types of districts increased substantially during each of the periods. The amount of increase, and the percentage of increase by type of district is presented in Table 19. When comparing the final percentage in Table 19 with the total percentage of increase in ADA for the state as presented in Table 5, the relationship is apparent. During the fifteen-year period studied, the ADA of the state increased 199.0 per cent, while the assessed valuation increased 246.7 per cent. The relationship of these two figures will be analyzed in detail in later sections of this 53 T A B L E 19 AMOUNT AND PERCENTAGE OF INCREASE IN ASSESSED VALUATION (In Thousands of Dollars) F irst Second Third Total Type Period Period Period Period (Per Cent) (Per Cent) (Per Cent) (Per Cent) Elementary $3, 408, 985 $4, 233, 766 $6, 480, 072 $14, 122, 823 (63.2) (48.1) (49.7) (261.9) High School 3, 392, 883 4,259, 000 6,435,990 14, 087, 873 (63. 1) (48.5) (49.4) (261. 8) Unified 1, 705, 006 2, 109, 105 3, 112, 811 6,926,922 (54. 3) (43.5) (44.8) (220.7) Total $5, 113,991 $6, 342, 871 $9,592,883 $21, 049, 745 (59.9) (46.5) (48.0) (246.7) study. As stated previously, however, the amount of assessed valuation in a school district, a county or a state, and changes in that figure over a period of time are not nearly so significant as the figures which represent the actual wealth of the district, county, or state, expressed in the amount of assessed valuation per pupil. Unless the assessed valuation of a unit increases at a minimum of the same rate as the number of pupils, the unit will decrease in wealth. Table 20 presents the wealth of the state in term s of assessed valuation per pupil in attendance in each type of district 54 T A B L E 20 STATE-WIDE AV/ADA BY TYPE OF DISTRICT Type 1945-46 1950-51 1955-56 1960-61 Elementary High School Unified $ 9,782 27,505 8, 250 $10,285 31,610 8, 291 $10,290 37,002 8, 723 $11,092 34, 787 9, 572 Total $ 7,568 $ 7,945 $ 8,273 $ 8,776 during each of the four years studied. It is evident from this table that in nearly all cases the growth in California has been accompanied by a steady increase in AV/ADA. The only exception was in high school districts during the third period, who dropped in wealth. The amount of change in AV/ ADA by type of district during each of the three five-year periods, and over the fifteen-year period is presented in Table 21. Table 21 points out that the increases in AV/ADA have been somewhat erratic, and vary from 0.05 per cent to 17. 1 per cent. It will be noted that the drop in the high school districts during the third period coincides with the extremely large percentage of increase in ADA during that period of tim e. Considering the whole fifteen-year period, however, high school districts increased almost 55 T A B L E 21 AMOUNT AND PERCENTAGE OF CHANGE IN AV/ADA BY TYPE OF DISTRICT Type F irst Period (Per Cent) Second Period (Per Cent) Third Period (Per Cent) Total Period (Per Cent) Elementary $ 503 $ 5 $ 802 $1, 310 (5.1) (0. 05) (7.8) (13.4) High School 4, 105 5, 392 2, 215 7,282 (14. 9) (17.1) (6.0) (26.5) Unified 41 432 849 1,322 (0.5) (5.2) (9.7) (16.0) T otal $ 377 $ 328 $ 503 $1,208 (5. 0) (4.1) (6.1) (16. 0) twice as much as elementary districts, and considerably more than unified. Wealth by county unit Even as growth was studied and reported by county unit, so should the assessed valuation and change in wealth of these m ost- growth and least-growth counties be investigated. The concept of the ratio of assessed valuation per pupil on a county unit has no bearing on the present methods of school support by the state or by local sources, but may be of interest in the future when the concept of 56 equalization on a county basis by use of the county-wide tax is studied. Considering first the assessed valuation of the fifteen most-growth and fifteen least-growth counties, Tables 22 and 23 present their assessed valuations at the beginning and the end of the fifteen-year period, and the percentage of increase in such valuations over the total period of time. The counties in these tables are p re sented in the order of amount of growth in the case of the m ost- growth counties, and in the amount of least growth in the case of the least-growth counties. Study of these two tables will bring out that there is con siderable difference between the highest and lowest counties in each group in term s of percentage of increase in assessed valuation. In the most-growth counties the variation is from 69. 6 per cent in San Francisco County to 518.9 per cent in Santa Clara, a range of 449.3 per cent, with a mean growth of 295. 3 per cent. By contrast, the percentage of increase in the fifteen least-growth counties varies from 33.8 per cent in Lassen County to 345. 7 per cent in Trinity. This indicates a range of 311.9 per cent, with a mean growth of 150.0 per cent. One may conclude from this data that the percentage of increase in assessed valuation in least-growth counties was just over one-half the mean percentage of increase in the most-growth counties. 57 T A B L E 22 ASSESSED VALUATIONS FOR FIFTEEN MOST GROWTH COUNTIES (In Thousands of Dollars) County Growth Rank Order AV 1945-46 AV 1960-61 P er Cent of Increase Los Angeles 1 $2, 983, 284 $11,699,711 292. 2 San Diego 2 327,408 1, 542, 588 371. 2 Orange 3 233,378 1, 254, 697 437.6 Santa Clara 4 204, 658 1, 266, 625 518.9 Alameda 5 525, 989 1, 435, 240 172.9 Sacramento 6 187,395 694, 341 270. 5 San Bernardino 7 180,868 882,212 387. 8 San Mateo 8 143, 870 831,537 478. 0 Contra Costa 9 196,645 838,024 326. 2 F resno 10 355,173 810, 218 128. 1 Riverside 11 113,927 618, 391 442.8 Kern 12 350, 989 734, 906 109.4 San Francisco 13 846,623 1, 435, 560 69. 6 Ventura 14 135,047 482,028 256.9 San Joaquin 15 163, 792 440, 787 169. 1 58 T A B L E 23 ASSESSED VALUATIONS FOR FIFTEEN LEAST-GROWTH COUNTIES (In Thousands of Dollars) County Growth Rank Order AV 1945-46 AV 1960-61 P er Cent of Increase Alpine 57 $ 1,457 $ 2,471 69. 6 Mono 56 7, 311 22, 922 213. 5 Mariposa 55 5,932 13, 055 120. 1 Lassen 54 18, 675 24, 988 33. 8 Modoc 53 11, 501 21,966 91.0 Amador 52 16,849 41,982 149.2 Calaveras 51 12,380 29,968 142. 1 Colusa 50 24, 221 47, 295 95. 3 Nevada 49 15,432 32,984 113.7 Lake 48 10, 800 35, 694 230. 5 Trinity 47 3, 546 15, 804 345.7 San Benito 46 16, 943 46, 049 171. 8 Sierra-Plum as 45 27,969 79,695 184.9 Inyo 44 17, 5Q5 43, 347 147. 6 Tuolumne 43 14,931 34, 564 131. 5 59 A much m ore meaningful statistic, however, is the AV/ADA change in these same counties during this period of time. Tables 24 and 25 present the percentage of change in AV/ ADA in the fifteen most-growth and fifteen least-growth counties during each of the five-year periods, and over the fifteen-year period. The counties are arranged in the same rank orders as in the previous two tables. Comparison of these two tables points out the following information. No particular patterns of change are evident in either table. It will be noted that a consistent increase is found in only one county of the least-growth counties, while the most-growth group contains five counties which had such an increase. The mean change of most-growth counties was 13. 3 per cent, and the mean change of least-growth counties was 24. 5 per cent. The state-wide increase of 16. 0 per cent, as noted previously in Table 21, falls between the means of the fifteen highest and fifteen lowest growth counties, but is closer to the mean of the least-growth counties. Eight of the fifteen most-growth counties dropped in wealth during the first five-year period, while two thirds of the least-growth counties dropped during the same period. In the second five-year period only one of the least-grow th and three of the m ost- growth counties lost in AV/ADA. 60 T A B L E 24 CHANGES IN AV/ADA OF FIFTEEN MOST-GROWTH COUNTIES (Expressed in Percentage of Change) County Growth Rank Order F irst Period Second Period Third Period Total Period Los Angeles 1 19.7 0. 2 15. 1 38. 1 San Diego 2 -5. 5 16. 4 8. 2 19. 1 Orange 3 18. 1 — 28. 0 -12. 6 -25. 7 Santa Clara 4 — 0. 6 2. 6 12.9 15. 1 Alameda 5 2.4 8.4 1.9 13. 1 Sacramento 6 -17. 1 -9.3 11.9 -15.9 San Bernardino 7 -1. 3 36. 6 9.0 46.9 San Mateo 8 -18. 3 25. 7 11.3 14. 3 Contra Costa 9 — 6. 2 44. 1 3.2 39.4 F resno 10 -1.9 -6.9 -5. 3 -13. 5 Riverside 11 55. 5 1.0 9. 2 71. 5 Kern 12 -9.2 0 . 0 -4.5 -13. 8 San Francisco 13 -10. 3 9.6 — 2. 6 -4. 3 Ventura 14 11. 0 2.6 11.8 0.5 San Joaquin 15 22. 4 11.1 5.3 14.6 61 T A B L E 25 CHANGES IN AV/ADA OF FIFTEEN LEAST-GROWTH COUNTIES (Expressed in Percentage of Change) County Growth Rank Order F irst Period Second Period Third Period Total Period Alpine 57 6.9 42. 7 -44.4 -15. 2 Mono 56 1.8 73. 0 -21.9 32. 5 Mariposa 55 -8. 2 30. 1 10. 4 31. 8 Lassen 54 -22. 2 21. 5 15. 0 8. 7 Modoc 53 -18.6 37. 2 -4. 0 6. 0 Amador 52 -7. 2 23.0 20. 3 37. 3 Calaveras 51 -6. 9 15. 8 23. 5 33. 3 Colusa 50 -20. 1 23. 8 5. 5 4.2 Nevada 49 — 3. 6 16. 5 2. 0 14.6 Lake 48 27.8 15.9 10. 5 63. 7 Trinity 47 -19. 0 10.6 -0. 8 -11. 1 San Benito 46 11.6 39.2 -3.9 49.2 Sierra-Plum as 45 -6.6 35. 1 23. 1 55. 2 Inyo 44 -32.4 16.4 36. 3 11. 0 Tuolumne 43 3. 7 -11.4 19.8 10. 0 62 Wealth by geographic area After studying assessed valuation and wealth changes on a state-wide basis and by counties, it is of interest to study the changes which have occurred on the basis of geographic areas. For this pur pose the wealth data were assembled from the same growth districts in each area as were used in Chapter II. Table 26 delineates the assessed valuation change over the fifteen-year period, along with the percentage of increase in each of the five areas. This information is presented by type of district organ ization in each area, but with no area grand totals. There is in sufficient consistency in location of elementary growth districts with in high school growth districts to perm it totals to be meaningful. Considering the percentage of increase in assessed valu ation in each area in comparison to the state total change in the assessed valuation of growth districts, it is noted that there is little consistency in any except the South Coastal area with this state average. The North Coastal, North Mountain, and Central Valley areas did not increase as much as the state average, while the San Francisco Bay area was above the state in all three types of dis tricts. Again proceeding to an analysis of the changes produced in AV/ADA by area, Tables 27, 28, and 29 list the amount and T A B L E 26 63 ASSESSED VALUATIONS OF GROWTH DISTRICTS BY AREA (In Thousands of Dollars) Area Level AV 1945-46 AV 1960-61 P e r Cent of Increas e North Coastal Elementary $ 29,142 $ 131,510 351. 3 High School 42, 132 169,378 302. 0 Unified 8, 343 27,061 224.4 North Mountain Elementary 41, 211 170,078 312. 7 High School 58, 135 186,895 221. 5 San Francisco Elementary 441,055 2, 385, 045 440. 8 Bay High School 612,112 3, 200, 111 422. 8 Unified 214,453 1, 075, 312 401.4 Central Valley Elementary 309,579 916,100 195.9 High School 678, 109 1, 665, 481 145. 6 Unified 315, 414 1, 051, 033 233. 2 South Coastal Elementary 2, 599, 284 10, 536, 924 305.4 High School 944, 848 5, 328, 106 463.9 Unified 858,479 4, 028, 376 369.2 State Total Elementary 3, 420, 271 14, 139, 657 313.4 (All Growth High School 2, 035, 336 10, 549, 971 418. 3 Districts) Unified 1, 396,689 6, 181, 782 342.6 TABLE 27 AV/ADA AND PERCENTAGE OF CHANGE BY AREA Area 1945-46 1950-51 1955-56 1960-61 Total Per Cent of Change (Elementary Districts) North Coastal $ 6,611 (-18.1) $ 5,415 (23.8) $ 6,703 (18. 5) $ 7,940 20.1 North Mountain 5,677 (1.6) 5, 585 (19.2) 6,655 (25.1) 8, 324 46.6 San Francisco Bay- 9,164 (-8.8) 8,353 (8.6) 9, 072 (-4. 3) 8,681 -5.3 Central Valley 7,313 (4.6) 7,649 (-2.4) 7,469 (-0.1) 7,463 2.1 South Coastal 9, 379 (14. 4) 10,730 (-5.9) 10,093 (8.9) 10,994 17.2 North Coastal North Mountain (High School Districts) 19,335 19,440 24,212 27,425 (0.1) (24.5) (13.3) 31,629 26,667 30,079 33, 578 (-15.7) (12.8) (11.6) 41.8 6.2 TABLE 2 7 •••Continued Area 1945-46 1950-51 1955-56 1960-61 Total Per Cent of Change San Francisco Bay $24,336 (3.1) $25, 080 (31.6) $32, 993 (-10.9) $29, 394 20.8 Central Valley 34, 165 (2.5) 35,009 (2.7) 35, 956 (-11.4) 31,858 -6, 8 South Coastal 23, 092 (20.4) 27, 795 (13.1) 31,424 (-6.1) 29,520 27.8 (Unified Districts) North Coastal 5,211 4,221 5,304 6, 154 (-19.0) (25.7) (16.0) 18. 1 San Francisco Bay 6,886 7,209 8, 192 9,410 (4.7) (13.6) (14.9) 36.7 Central Valley 6, 267 5, 890 5,417 5, 783 (-6.0) (-8.0) (6.8) -7.7 South Coastal 6,891 7, 778 7,838 9, 161 (12.9) (0.7) (16.9) 32.9 O ' m 66 T A B L E 28 PERCENTAGE OF CHANGE, STATE-WIDE, ALL DISTRICTS Type F irst Period Second Period Third Period Total Period Average Increase P e r Year Elementary ADA 55.2 48. 0 38.9 219.2 14.6 AV 63. 2 48. 1 49.7 261.9 17. 5 AV/ADA 5. 1 0. 1 7.8 13.4 0.9 High School ADA 41.9 26. 9 58.9 186. 1 12.4 AV 63. 1 48. 5 49.4 261. 8 17. 5 AV/ADA 14.9 17. 1 -6. 0 26. 5 1.8 Unified ADA 53. 6 36.4 31.9 176.4 11.4 AV 54. 3 43. 5 44.8 220. 7 14.7 AV/ADA 0.5 5.2 9.7 16. 0 1. 1 All D istricts ADA 52. 4 40. 7 39.5 199.0 13.3 AV 59.9 46. 5 48. 0 246. 7 16.4 AV/ADA 5.0 4. 1 6. 1 16. 0 1. 1 67 T A B L E 29 PERCENTAGE OF CHANGE, STATE-WIDE, OF GROWTH DISTRICTS Type F irst Period Second Period Third Period Total Period Average Increase P er Year Elementary ADA 60.8 59. 3 44.8 271. 1 18. 1 AV 72. 5 54. 3 55. 3 313.4 20.9 AV/ADA 7. 3 — 3. 1 7.2 11.4 0.8 High School , ADA 57. 0 43. 6 73. 3 290.7 19.4 AV 97. 1 64. 8 59.5 418. 3 27.9 AV/ADA 25. 5 14. 8 -7.9 32.7 2.2 Unified ADA 65. 5 54. 0 41.4 260. 4 17.4 AV 77. 1 55.9 60. 3 342.6 22. 8 AV/ADA 7.0 1.2 13.4 22.8 1.5 percentage of change in AV/ADA by type of district. This informa tion concerns only the growth districts of each type within the areas. Study of these three tables shows that in all areas except the San Francisco Bay area, elementary districts increased in wealth, with the rate of increase in the North Mountain area more than double any other area. In high school districts only the Central Valley area dropped in wealth, with the North Coastal area showing the greatest increase. Of the four areas containing unified districts, only the Central Valley group dropped in wealth, with the two most populous areas, San Francisco Bay and South Coastal, showing great increases. Summary of the chapter This chapter is concerned with a study of the changes in the assessed valuation of school districts in California during the fifteen-year period studied, on a state-wide basis, on the basis of county organization, and by geographic location. It is further con cerned with a study of what has occurred in the ratio of assessed valuation to the number of pupils in average daily attendance. Although the number of pupils in the state has been in creasing at a larger rate each year, the assessed valuations of the same school districts have been increasing at a greater rate. This chapter brings out that the wealth per student, the amount of assessed valuation behind each child, has had a net increase during the period studied. An assumption might be made from this statement that the districts, therefore, are m ore capable of supporting themselves now than was possible in the fiscal year 1945-46. However, it should be borne in mind that the general cost of living, and the consequent cost of educating these pupils, has risen at an even faster rate than the 69 ability of the districts to bear this cost. This point is treated in further detail in P a rt IV of this study. The next chapter deals with the relationships which are evident from a study of this chapter and the preceding one. It estab lishes a statistical basis upon which to evaluate the statement so commonly heard that with rapid growth automatically comes a rapid decrease in assessed valuation per pupil, with the consequent decrease in the ability of a district to support itself. C H A P T E R IV RELATIONSHIPS OF GROWTH TO WEALTH CHANGE Comparisons of all districts Determination of the amount of taxable assessed valuation for each pupil in average daily attendance is one of the prim ary steps to be taken in computing the amount of state support to be received by any school district. This information is also used to determine the amount of local support per pupil which can be gained through tax sources. Comparisons of the yearly products of this division produce the changes that occur in the district due to (1) changes in the number of pupils in average daily attendance, (2) changes in the amount of assessed valuation, or (3) a combination of both of the above. In a state such as California with great growth in popula tion, expansion of industry, and great amounts of commercial and residential building, there are very few districts where either the number of pupils or the amount of assessed valuation remains stable. When one of these factors remains constant and the other changes 70 71 significantly, the resultant wealth change is in direct proportion to the change. For example, in a district with 500 pupils and $10, 000,000 in assessed valuation, the AV/ADA is $20, 000. Raising the assessed valuation to twelve million yields an AV / ADA of $24, 000 if the pupil population remains the same. However, if the ADA increases to 800 during the same period of time, the resultant AV/ADA drops to $15,000. A direct inverse ratio always exists when the population increases and the assessed valuation remains the same, while a direct ratio always exists between assessed valu ation and wealth when the pupil population remains the same. Over the fifteen-year period studied, growth has been the constant process, and this chapter deals with the relationships which exist between growth and change in AV/ADA on a state-wide, county, and geographic area basis. As a first step in the analysis of the relationships which are evident between growth and change in wealth, the percentage of change in ADA, assessed valuation, and AV/ADA are presented in Table 28. These percentages of change are presented for each of the three five-year periods, for the whole fifteen-year period, and a final column of the average increase per year in each of the types of districts studied. The data herein represents information on all districts in the state. 72 It will be noted that the percentage of increase in the assessed valuation is larger than the increase in ADA in nearly all cases. This relationship will produce a positive change in AV/ADA. The only exception to this process occurs during the period of 1955-56 to 1960-61 in high school districts. It will be rem em bered that this was the period of exceptional increase in the number of high school pupils as pointed out in Chapter II. However, the total high school district AV/ADA increased at an average of 1.8 per cent per year, just double the average increase in elementary districts. There appears no significant difference between the average yearly rate in elementary and unified districts as compared with the state average. The period of least change occurred between 1950-51 and 1955-56 in elementary districts, where a change of only 0. 1 per cent was evi dent. High school districts experienced the greatest increase, that of 14.9 per cent, between the years of 1945-46 and 1950-51. Comparisons of growth districts Since P arts III and IV of this study will deal with the economic and sociological factors of growth, and information therein will be based upon selected growth districts, the comparative infor mation of all 412 growth districts is now presented. Table 29 gives the same information in the same order 73 as Table 28, but concerns itself only with the selected 412 growth districts. As one would expect, the percentages of change in ADA in growth districts over the same periods of time would be larg er than those presented in Table 28, which gives the state total of all dis tricts. However, it is important to note that the assessed valuation in these districts also increased at a greater percentage. The resultant increase in AV/ADA, therefore, is generally greater. There were two periods of drop in AV/ADA in the growth districts, between the years of 1950-51 and 1955-56 the elementary growth dis tricts exhibited a drop of 3. 1 per cent, and the high school growth districts also dropped during the period from 1955-56 to 1960-61. All other periods and types showed increases ranging from 1.2 per cent to 25. 5 per cent. The resultant average yearly increase in AV/ADA of 0.8 per cent in elementary districts was slightly under the all-district average of 0.9 per cent, but the averages of high school and unified districts was above the state average. One might be tempted at this point to state that the oft- heard statement that with a rapid increase in growth comes a con sequent decrease in AV/ADA is false. The facts just presented do not tend to justify such a statement. The remaining portions of this 74 chapter present the statistical treatment of the above information, designed to further clarify the relationships of these two factors. Correlation of growth to wealth change, state-wide The data concerning percentage of increase in ADA of the 412 growth districts were arranged in order by elementary districts, high school districts, unified districts, and all districts. Examina tion of this distribution indicated wide deviations from normalcy, considerable difference between medians and means, and strong skewness in all cases. Arrangement of the data on wealth increase or decrease was closer to a normal distribution, but still slightly skewed. One of the requirements for the use of the Pearson Product-moment method of correlation is an assumption of a normal distribution in both variables. Since this assumption was not possi ble in this case, the use of the Pearson method was discarded. No such assumptions are necessary for the use of the Spearman Rank- order correlation, hence the computer was programmed to compute the Spearman rho for each type of district, and for all growth dis tricts. When computing a rank-order correlation in elementary growth districts the data were arranged in descending order in percentage of change in both ADA and AV/ADA. The resultant 75 correlation was -. 57. According to the common interpretation of correlations this relationship might be expressed in the following manner. In elementary districts there is a moderate reverse c o rre lation between growth and increase in wealth, or stated in another manner, there exists a moderate correlation, a substantial relation ship, between growth and decrease in wealth. The same procedure applied to high school growth dis tricts produced a correlation of 34. This indicates a low co rrela tion, a definite but sm all relationship between growth and decrease in wealth. Treatm ent of the data for unified districts yielded a corre lation of -.63. This indicates a moderate correlation, or a substan tial relationship between growth and decrease in wealth in unified dis tricts. When districts of all types were grouped together and the same correlation procedure applied, a correlation of -. 53 was ob tained. This indicates the same relationship as elementary districts and unified districts, that of moderate correlation, a substantial relationship between growth and decrease in wealth. In term s of the coefficient of alienation and the predictive efficiency of these correlations, Table 30 lists the data for all four distributions, showing the coefficient of correlation, coefficient of 76 alienation, and the percentage over a chance relationship between the two variables. TABLE 30 CORRELATIVE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN GROWTH AND WEALTH CHANGE Type Coefficient of Correlation Coefficient of Alienation Predictive Ability (Per Cent) Elementary . 57 . 83 17 High School . 34 .94 6 Unified . 63 . 78 22 Total .53 .85 15 As is evident in this table, the predictive ability of growth as a m easure of change in wealth is 17 per cent better than a chance relationship in the elementary districts, 6 per cent in high school districts, and 22 per cent better than chance in unified districts. It will be noted that all correlations are stated as positive by the state ment of the relationship as increase in change in ADA and decrease in AV/ADA. The basic data from which these correlations were 77 drawn are stated in Table 31, which presents the mean, median, standard deviation, maximum, and minimum of each distribution. Correlation of growth to wealth change by county unit When the data on a state-wide basis were studied, the possibility was considered that there might be a more significant relationship by county unit than was evident on a state-wide basis. Therefore the data on growth and change in wealth were correlated by type of district in each county which contained enough districts of each type to perm it the effective use of rank-order correlation pro cedures. The information so obtained is presented in Table 32. All correlations expressed herein are on the basis of an increase in ADA correlated with an increase in AY/ADA, and consequently most correlations are expressed as negative. It is evident from the information in this table that group ing districts by county unit produces much higher correlations be tween growth and change in wealth than is obtained on a state-wide basis. Of the twenty-three counties containing enough elementary districts to perm it correlation, fifteen show a higher correlation than was obtained in all elementary growth districts. It is in terest ing to note that four of these counties, Kern, Monterey, San Luis Obispo and Shasta, show a positive correlation, indicating that in T A B L E 31 78 BASIC DATA ON DISTRIBUTION, GROWTH DISTRICTS Type Mean Median Standard Deviation Maximum Minimum Growth Elementary (N=261) 816 374 1,424 12, 814 102 High School (N=93) 350 256 280 1, 546 103 Unified fN=581 830 255 1, 634 10, 434 102 Total (N=412) 713 317 1, 310 12, 814 102 Wealth Elementary 25. 7 20.9 62. 6 266. 6 -92.0 High School 29.5 22. 5 49.9 222. 8 -71. 0 Unified 34.4 23.9 77.7 333. 7 o * < M 0 0 I Total 27.8 21. 5 62.4 333. 7 -92.0 those counties an increase in ADA has been accompanied by an increase in AV/ADA. In the case of Kern County, this correlation of .71 indicates a high correlation, a marked relationship between the two variables. Of the counties showing a negative correlation, Sonoma's correlation of .94 indicates a very high correlation, a very 79 T A B L E 32 CORRELATION OF GROWTH AND WEALTH CHANGE BY COUNTY UNIT County Elementary High School Unified Alameda 54 Contra Costa -.62 -. 50 Fresno 10 Humboldt -.40 Kern . 71 Los Angeles -.7 4 -. 84 Marin -.87 Monterey . 50 Orange — . 66 — , 26 Riverside -.81 Sacramento o 0 0 • t San Bernardino -.61 -. 26 San Diego -. 54 -.40 San Luis Obispo . 30 San Mateo — . 89 Santa B arbara -. 83 Santa Clara I . -.60 Santa Cruz 10 Shasta . 20 Sonoma -.94 Stanislaus -. 50 Ventura -. 68 Yuba -.40 80 dependable relationship between increase in ADA and decrease in AV/ADA. Among the six counties with enough high school districts to perm it correlation, four obtained higher correlations than those obtained on a state-wide basis. In these same counties their ele mentary districts were also higher than the state correlation. Only three counties contained enough unified districts to perm it effective correlative procedures, but all three produced much higher negative correlations than the state-wide treatm ent. These three counties also exhibited high negative correlations in their high school and elementary districts. Correlations of growth and wealth change by geographic area Grouping of districts into the same geographic areas which were defined previously and computing rank-order correlations therein produced the information which is presented in Table 33. Much lower relationships were found when grouping in this manner than on either the state-wide or county unit basis in the cases of the North Mountain area, and the Central Valley area. No area shows a correlation much higher than the state average. 81 TABLE 33 CORRELATION BY GEOGRAPHIC AREAS Area Rank-Order Correlation North Coastal -. 58 North Mountain — . 12 San Francisco Bay -.65 Central Valley -.44 South Coast -.61 Other comparative methods Upon listing the basic information on growth and change in wealth in rank order and examination thereof, it became visually evident that certain relationships exist when considering the ex trem es of both variables. In order to further analyze these relation ships, a portion of the 412 growth districts were placed in six cate gories based on their amount of increase in ADA. These divisions were made arbitrarily on the bases of a minimum of thirty districts in each category, and with an ADA increase limit in round numbers. The number of districts in column two of Table 34 represents the actual number of districts among the 412 growth districts whose 82 T A B L E 34 C O R R ELA TIO N BY AM OUNT O F GROW TH, S T A T E -W ID E P e r Cent of Increase in ADA Number of D istrict Rank- Order C orre lation Growth Wealth Change Median Mean Median Mean 100-200 35 .37 113 111 44.6 52. 1 250-300 30 . 18 271 270 30. 0 39.8 400-500 35 -.32 449 448 11. 0 17. 2 650-1, 000 38 .07 795 790 -9. 4 -8. 5 1, 000-2, 000 37 -.09 1, 217 1, 310 -19. 8 — 2. 6 2,000-13,000 31 -.52 2,739 4, 238 -56. 8 -49.2 increase in ADA fell between the lim its of column one. When viewing column three of the above table it is evi dent that there is a relationship between the amount of increase in ADA and the type and amount of correlation between growth and wealth change. The selected districts whose growth was the least, from 100 per cent to 120 per cent, show a positive correlation, while the districts with the most growth, from 2, 000 per cent to 13,000 per cent, show a much higher negative correlation. P ra c tically no correlation exists between growth and wealth change in districts whose percentages of increase in ADA fall between 650 and 83 2, 000. It will be noted that the distribution of districts within the lim its imposed by Table 34 is fairly norm al in the variable of growth, in that the means and medians are close together. There is still considerable disparity, however, in the distribution of change in wealth percentages, as evidenced by the continued difference between means and medians of most of the groups. As a further means of examination of the data on growth and change in wealth, the 412 growth districts were divided into ten categories. This procedure produces a decile grouping. Within this grouping structure the mean change in wealth was computed, along with the median ADA change in each decile. Table 35 presents a comparison of the means and medians, along with the range in change of ADA found within each decile grouping. This table points out that only two of the decile groupings in ADA change had a mean wealth change which was negative. With the exception of the fifth and eighth deciles, all the groupings present a consistently greater mean change in wealth. A correlative table to the following would present the information in the reverse order. Such information is presented in Table 36, which gives a decile grouping by rank-order in change in wealth, along with the ranges in each decile, the median wealth 84 T A B L E 35 DISTRIBUTION OF MEAN WEALTH CHANGE BY GROWTH RANK-ORDER Rank-Order in Change of ADA Range in Change of ADA Median ADA Change Mean Wealth Change 1-41 12,814-1,496 2, 539 — 43, 5 42-82 1,380-835 1, 100 -3.3 83-123 834-596 668 1.2 124-164 592-440 47 5 19.0 165-205 438-319 367 49.4 206-246 318-246 274 30.9 247-287 244-194 212 41. 1 288-328 193-154 169 73.4 329-369 153-125 136 57.9 370-412 124-102 115 50. 8 change, and the mean ADA change. Table 36 indicates that only one of the decile groupings, the fourth decile, has a mean which is out of a consistent order of increase of change in ADA corresponding to a consistently decreas ing median in change in wealth. 85 T A B L E 36 DISTRIBUTION OF MEAN ADA CHANGE BY WEALTH CHANGE RANK-ORDER Rank-Order Change in Wealth Range in Change in Wealth Median Wealth Change Mean ADA Change 1-41 334-95 147 269 42-82 95-70 83 278 83-123 69-49 55 327 124-164 49-33 43 354 165-205 33-22 28 346 206-246 22-8 17 353 247-287 8 -/-5 2 505 288-328 -5-/-21 -13 569 329-369 -21-/-43 -32 1, 118 370-412 -43-/-92 -57 3, 037 The foregoing two tables indicate a reasonably consistent relationship between increase in ADA and a relative decrease in assessed valuation per student. One tends to imply that districts which grew slowly also increased in AV/ ADA at a greater rate* and districts which grew quickly increased in AV/ADA at a slower rate, or in the extreme cases usually dropped in AV/ADA. 86 S u m m a ry of the ch a p ter Iii this- cliaptei* is presented the relationships between change in ADA and change in wealth. All districts in the state were grouped together, and the changes in wealth, ADA, and AV/ADA over each five-year period, over the total fifteen-year period, and the average yearly increases in each were computed. For all districts in California growth increased almost 200 per cent, while wealth increased almost 247 per cent, resulting in a net increase in AV/ADA of 16 per cent. Growth districts show a 260 per cent increase in growth and a 343 per cent increase in wealth, with a consequent net increase in AV/ADA of 23 per cent. Correlation of growth to wealth by use of rank-order produced a negative correlation of . 53 state-wide, a substantial relationship between increase in ADA and decrease in wealth. When compared on a county basis, the correlation was generally higher than on a state basis, reaching as high as -. 94 in one county. Group ing by geographical area produces less correlation in several cases than the state-wide comparison, and considerable less than the county unit basis. Comparisons of means and medians in decile groupings shows a definite strong relationship between increase in ADA and decrease in wealth in large-grow th districts, but a strong relationship 87 between increase in ADA and increase in wealth in small-growth districts. Districts lying in the mid-range of percentage of growth tend to have insignificant correlations between growth and wealth. In general, districts which grow rapidly tend to decrease in wealth, while districts which grow slowly tend to increase in wealth. C H A PT E R V SUMMARY OF FINDINGS: PART H This chapter presents a summary of the findings in P art H of the study, Financial Factors of Growth. The findings of Chapter II concerning growth in California school districts are presented first, followed by the findings in the area of assessed valuation and change in wealth per pupil. The final section of the chapter lists the findings in the area of the relationships between growth in ADA and changes in assessed valuation per pupil in average daily attendance. Findings concerning growth 1. The number of pupils in average daily attend- ance in California elementary, high school, and unified districts during the fifteen-year period studied increased from 1, 127, 392 in 1945-46 to 3, 370,809 in 1960-61. This represents a state-wide increase of 199 per cent. 88 Fifty-four per cent of this growth was in ele mentary districts, while high school districts witnessed 16 per cent and unified districts the remaining 30 per cent. Of the total growth over the fifteen*year period, 26 per cent occurred during the period from 1945-46 to 1950-51. The next five-year period, from 1950-51 to 1955-56, saw 31 per cent of the total growth, while the remaining 43 per cent occurred during the final five-year period from 1955-56 to 1960-61. The 412 selected growth districts, approximately one-fourth of the districts in the state in 1960-61, contained almost 76 per cent of the ADA in the state. Their growth represented 83 per cent of the total growth in the state. Fifteen counties contained 86 per cent of the ADA in the state during the fiscal year 1960-61. The fifteen counties of least«growth contained less than 1 per cent of the ADA of the state during the final year of the study. 90 7. Growth in California school districts centers around five geographic areas* The North Coastal and North Mountain areas each con tained less than 1 per cent of the toted, state growth, while the Central Valley area con tained 11 per cent. Most of the growth is found in the South Coastal area, which con tained 51 per cent, and in the San Francisco Bay area, where 19 per cent occurred. Findings concerning assessed valuation and wealth per pupil 1. The assessed valuation in school districts in California has increased during the fifteen- year period at approximately the same rate as the pupil population. 2. Unified districts have increased at a slightly lesser rate than have elementary and high school districts. 3. The assessed valuation per pupil in average daily attendance has increased over this period of time in all three types of districts. E le mentary districts have witnessed a 13 per cent 91 increase, high school districts a 27 per cent increase, and unified districts a 16 per cent increase. 4. A ssessed valuations in the fifteen most-growth counties increased at almost double the rate of the fifteen least-growth counties. 5. Five of the fifteen most-growth counties dropped in assessed valuation per unit of average daily attendance, while only two of the counties in the least-growth counties followed this course. 6. Elementary districts increased in wealth in all areas except the San Francisco Bay area. In high school districts only the Central Valley area dropped in wealth, while in unified districts only the Central Valley districts dropped in a s sessed valuation per pupil. Findings concerning relationships of growth to wealth change 1. Considering all the growth districts in the state, a correlation of . 57 exists between growth and decrease in wealth of elementary districts, a correlation of • 34 for high school districts, and a correlation of • 63 in unified districts. The correlation obtained between growth and decrease in wealth is . 53 when considering all three types of districts together. Much higher correlations than these in all three types of districts are obtained when dis tricts are grouped by county unit. Three of the five geographic areas produced slightly higher correlations between growth and decrease in wealth than those obtained state-wide, but the remaining two areas showed considerably lower correlations. Districts of extreme growth have the highest correlation between growth and decrease in wealth. In districts of moderate growth, no significant correlations between growth and decrease in wealth are evident. Districts whose growth was between 100 per cent and 200 per cent over the fifteen-year period show a significant relationship between amount of growth and an increase in wealth. p a r t in A STUDY OF SELECTED ECONOMIC FACTORS RELATED TO THE FINANCIAL SUPPORT OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN CALIFORNIA CHAPTER VI THE PROBLEM AND ITS DEVELOPMENT Introduction During the course of World War H, local governments in California cities, school districts, county and special districts alike, enjoyed a fiscal condition wherein they were virtually assured revenues in excess of current expenditures. The people were real izing increased incomes and tax monies accrued to local governments in direct proportion. With the conclusion of World War II there occurred, in parallel, a fiscal reverse. This condition was due to a multitude of forces, but in essence a state of affairs in which demands for expend itures exceeded revenue capability. The principal developments that offer an explanation for this fiscal turnabout were: 1. An unprecedented growth in California^ population in the postwar period. In 1945, the population of the state totaled 9, 344, 000; in 1958 the population was approximately 14 million; by I960 the population had exceeded the 15 million mark (50;A39). 94 The change in the age distribution of the population in California. In 1930, some 15.5 per cent of the state*s population was in the 0«*9 age group; in 1950 the same group constituted over 18 per cent of the population (5:159). The percentage change witnessed between 1950 and I960 for the state*s population under five years of age was 58. 8; for the state*s population in the age range 5-13, inclusive, the percentage change amounted to 102.1 (41:37). This second development translated itself directly into increased school enrollments. A third condition making its contribution to the fiscal reversal witnessed by local govern ments was the high degree of population mobility in the postwar period. The combina tion of a sustained rate of migration into California, and the massive movements to suburbia multiplied the responsibilities of 96 local government units. 4. Compounding this unparalleled growth pattern and accompanying new fiscal responsibilities came an inexorable trend to higher prices and expenditure levels. Specific to school districts, the enrollment increases meant a higher level of expenditures for classroom s and teachers; for cities and counties the population surge demanded increased expenditures for govern mental services, parks, and recreation. Popu lation growth requires virtually inescapable social responsibilities. 5. Finally, local governmental units emerged from World War II with a substantial backlog of public projects that had been placed aside for a period of years. Relatively broad program s of school construction, water and sewage developments, and street repair, to mention but a few, had to be undertaken on an immediate and on-going basis. 97 When the foregoing principal developments are contem plated, it is self-evident that sheer growth creates tremendous pressures in the direction of increased costs and expenditures by local governmental agencies* All of these must be fiscally supported in the main from local revenue sources. In over-view, the m atter in toto may be translated into a direct condition of pronounced im balance between expenditure program s and the traditional source of local revenue, specifically, the property tax. This imbalance may be reasonably explained by factors that condition the revenue source of the budget. Local governmental agencies have had to approach fiscal support by placing great reliance upon the property tax. This situation coupled with the wide variations in the fiscal prowess of the property tax within different local governmental units invite and create difficulty. The rapid growth areas in the state may have the least fiscal capacity in term s of generating revenue under the prop erty tax base. Stated differently, there is not necessarily a direct relationship between rate of growth in a given area and the rate of increase in the revenue capacity of the property tax. The so-called "bedroom community" unquestionably creates dollar expenditure demands greater than the property tax dollar generated in such communities (5:160-61). 98 Thus, the sources of the financial plight, the revenue and growth differentials occurring between local governmental units, especially school districts, are many. The very essence of the problem, however, is simply a function of tremendous expenditure pressures exerted by sheer force of growth, compounded by a local revenue source--taxable wealth--that by its very nature has created fiscal discrepancies of great magnitude between local units of government throughout California. Statement of purpose The guiding purpose of this part of the study was to determine what specific land-use changes, and therefore pattern changes in taxable wealth, occurred coincident with the growth in wealth witnessed among growth districts in California over the period 1945-46 through 1960-61. In the course of this effort, it was the ultimate design objective to compare and contrast the land-use changes obtained from growth districts and thereby account for the differential in wealth per ADA observed from the data presented in P art II of the study. The foregoing approach came as a direct outgrowth of given data expressed in P a rt II of the study. The 412 growth dis tricts -selected'Ior study represented approximately 25 per cent of the school districts in California in 1960-61, containing almost 99 76 per cent of the ADA and accounting for 83 per cent of the total growth in the State, In the period 1945-46 through 1960-61, the state wide increase in ADA was 199 per cent. The assessed valuation-- taxable wealth--in school districts in California in the fifteen-year period increased at approximately the same rate as the pupil popu lation. Finally, as expressed in Table 31, P a rt II of the study, the data conveyed a wide differential in wealth per ADA, ranging from a 333. 7 per cent increase to a 92 per cent decrease over the fifteen- year period among the 412 selected growth districts studied. Thus, this part of the study was predicated essentially on three basic findings as expressed in P art II. (1) That the districts treated all witnessed growth ranging from 12, 814 per cent to 102 per cent in accordance -with Table 31, P art II, (2) the percentage of change in ADA and assessed valuation-«taxable wealth--among the growth districts studied conveyed an increase in both instances, in accordance with Table 29, P a rt II, and (3) that the growth districts, despite increases in assessed valuation or taxable wealth, exhibited rather dramatic differentials in term s of wealth per ADA. These conditions, entertained as a totality, invited the investigator into those selected economic factors-»land-us e changes--that might account for the variances in wealth per ADA presented in P a rt II of the study. 100 The investigator was thus concerned with seeking answers to the following specific questions: 1. What particular land-use changes occurred among the growth districts selected for study over the period 1945-46 through 1960-61? 2. Does the appearance or absence of these selected economic factors--land-use changes--among the growth districts studied account for the discerned upward or downward trends in assessed valuation per ADA ? 3. Could a "land-use model" be obtained from the investigation that might be utilized for predictive purposes, for the benefit of current and future growth districts in California? Importance of the study The taxable wealth and thereby financial ability of a school district might be m easured conceivably by the per capita income of its residents, retail sales volume, or some other selected indices. Whether the level of economic activity is expanding or on the decline in term s of vigor, the needs continue for the basic services rendered by local governm ent--sanitary and safety regula tions, police and fire protection, and, specific to this study, 101 education. The principal medium of revenue to support such local governmental services is the local property tax. Since the state specifies that taxes for public school support may be levied only on secured and unsecured property, the local property tax is accordingly the prime source of revenue for school districts. Thus, the concept of wealth ow ned--property--is of tremendous significance from the standpoint of fiscal support of public and other local government services rendered, m ore important in fact than all other taxes together (14:viii). This study is but another attempt to gain additional insights into this source of revenue, over and beyond that treated in the literature. Sources of information in the literature The subjects of financial support of local government units, sources of revenue and property taxation have been amply treated in the literature. Text books in the fields of public finance and taxation, public and educational administration, and school finance lend varying degrees of emphasis to the subject of taxable wealth and property taxation. Although most literature sources in the field of taxation and public finance include a treatm ent of prop erty taxation, there has occurred only one study since 1931 devoted specifically to the subject of property taxation. This definitive work 102 is Jens P . Jensen's Property Taxation in the United States, published in 1931, considered by authorities to be a virtual classic in its field. Since Jensen's book was written, sin imposing amount of literature in the field of property taxation has been written; however, much of it is highly specialized in nature treating particular or specific prob lems or considerations in the field, thus not appearing in a single organized form, as is the case in Jensen's work. Jensen's book came as an outgrowth of a ten-year intensive study by its author (14:viii). The author presents a detailed treatm ent of the theory and economics of property taxation, showing its history and development; the various administrative aspects of the tax are treated in detail. Finally, the book presents aspects of the tax thought by the author to be essential to a sound system of property taxation. Among other books containing excellent basic treatm ent of the subject of property taxation are: Harold M. Groves, Financing Government (1950); William J. Shultz and C. Lowell H arriss, American Public Finance (1949); M. Slade Kendrick, Public Finance Principles and Problem s (1951); William H. Anderson, Taxation and the American Economy (1951); and John A. Vieg, et al, California Local Finance (I960). Another important source of literature on the subject is publications of learned organizations and societies. The following 103 are some of their publications: The Journal of Finance, The Journal of Sociology, Land Economics, The American Economic Review, The Journal of Accounting, and The Residential Appraiser (formerly The Review of the Society of Residential A ppraisers). Many government publications contain important data on property taxes. The following represent some of the publications: The Statistical Abstract of the United States--published by the Bureau of the Census; The Survey of Current Business--published monthly by the Department of Commerce; The Monthly Labor Review-published by the Department of Labor; State Finances, City Finances, County Finances--published by the Bureau of the Census; and, specific to California, the Annual Governor's Budget to the California Legis- lature--published by the state of California. Other sources of information on property taxation are special reports by legislative committees, such as the Report of the Senate Interim Committee on State and Local Taxation, California State Senate. A valuable source of information on property assessm ent and taxation in California is the A ssessor's Handbook, state of California--published by the Division of Assessm ent Standards of the California State Board of Equalization. In addition to the foregoing sources, graduate studies 104 performed at various universities and colleges are obtainable through the library, or from the libraries of such institutions. One of the most intensive studies in the field of property taxation was Lang Lewis Cantrell,s dissertation, "Some Basic Modifications of American Property Taxation" (1953). Cantrell presented an excel lent treatm ent of the history, economics,and modernization of the property tax. His chapters on the economics of property taxation were of particular value in the preparation of this study. In the course of selecting the literature sources utilized in this study, and in an effort to lend validity to the choices made, the following criteria were established as guidelines: 1. Frequency of mention of such sources in the literature surveyed. 2. Comprehensiveness of subject m atter coverage in the literature selected. 3. Cross-validation of the sources selected by agreement of experts and practitioners in the fields of economics and taxation as to the representativeness of the literature sources used. 105 Organization of the rem ainder of P a rt III of the study The present chapter has explained the nature of the problem, stated the purpose, presented the importance of the prob lem, and set forth sources of information in the literature. Chapter VII presents a brief treatm ent of the public school revenue structure on both the national and state levels; Chapter VIII will be concerned with the subjects of property taxation, property valuation, and land- use; Chapter IX presents a justification of the questionnaire used in the study and the sample obtained, particular emphasis is placed on this part of the study in this chapter; Chapter X gives a summary of the findings based on a statistical treatm ent of the data obtained from Section I of the questionnaire, Economic Factors. Considered in over-view, the chapter arrangem ent in this part of the study was designed to establish progressively (1) the relative importance of the property tax in support of public educa tion; (2) the importance of land-use in property taxation, and the property valuation process, leading ultimately to (3) a justification for the utilization of land-use categories in Section I of the question naire. CH A PTER VII THE PUBLIC SCHOOL REVENUE STRUCTURE The preceding chapter served as an introduction to P art II of the dissertation, setting forth in turn a general introduc tion, a statement of the purpose and the problem undertaken, the importance of the study, sources of information in the literature and the arrangem ent of the chapters. The present chapter presents a brief treatm ent of sources of school support on both a national and state level. In addition, this chapter presents data designed to sub stantiate the relative importance of the property tax as c source of revenue for public school support. Public school revenue sources among the states The four levels of government participate in the support of A m erica's public schools. The four levels of support are federal, state, county, and local. Practice among the states in the support of public edu cation varies so widely as to make generalization virtually impossible. 106 107 In actuality, data covering the United States as a whole create a problem in that differences among the states is thereby concealed, but they do accomplish the purpose intended here, that of conveying trends. The general trend of school revenue receipts for selected years commencing with 1929-30 are presented in Table 37. The percentage of public school revenue provided by the federal government increased from .4 in 1929-30 to an estimated 3. 7 in 1962-63; the percentage provided by state governments increased from 16. 9 in 1929-30 to an estimated 39. 2 in 1962-63 and the p e r centage provided locally decreased from 82.7 in 1929-30 to an esti mated 57. 1 in 1962-63. It is not possible to accurately and completely analyze the types of taxes covering all the revenue receipts of the public schools. Funds received from federal sources are realized from the general tax sources of the federal government. Funds obtained from state sources are almost all derived from general state revenues or earm arked taxes, although in some states income from permanent funds and endowments is significant. Approximately 94 per cent of the local revenue obtained for public school support was derived from tax sources in 1954. An estimated 98. 6 per cent of local tax collections for public schools 108 TA B L E 37 PERCENTAGE OF SCHOOL MONEY FROM LOCAL AND COUNTY, STATE AND FEDERAL SOURCES 1929-30 TO 1962-63a Year Local and County State Federal 1929-30 82. 7 16.9 0.4 1933-34 75.4 23.4 1.2 1937-38 69.3 29. 5 1.2 1941-42 67. 1 31. 5 1.4 1945-46 63.8 34.8 1.4 1949-50 57. 3 39.8 2.9 1957-58 55. 8 40. 6 3. 6 1959-60 56. 2 39.4 4.4 1962-63 57. 1 39.2 3.7 (estimated) aData for years 1929-30 to 1941-42 from U. S. Office of Education, Statistics of State School Systems, Washington, D. C ,; for 1945-46 from Edgar L. Morphet and Erich L . Lindman, Public School Finance Program s of the Forty-Eight States, U. S. Office of Education, C ircular No. 274 (Washington, D. C. : Government Printing Office, 1950); 1949-50 from Biennial Surveys and Statistical C irculars, U. S. Office of Education, Washington, D. C .; 1957-58 from advanced Estim ates of the Public Elementary and Secondary Schools for the Year 1957-58, N .E .A ., Washington, D. C .; 1959-60 from Financing the Public Schools, 1960-70, Special P roject on School Finance, 1962, N .E .A ., Washington, D. C. ; and for 1962-63 from N .E .A . Research Bulletin, Vol. 41, No. 1, February, 1963, N. E .A ., Washington, D. C. 109 was derived from property taxes. In the year 1954, about 53 per cent of the total public school revenue receipts from all sources were derived from property taxes (16:116). That percentage has probably continued through 1962-63 on the strength of the fact that there has been little fluctuation in the percentage of revenue derived from state sources since 1949-50, as reflected in Table 37 above. It can there fore be reasonably established that the property tax is still singularly the most important type of tax levied for the support of public schools in America. Public school revenue sources in California As is true in other states, expenditures by school dis tricts in California are made possible by revenues derived from federal aid, state aid, local school district taxes, and "other reve- nues"-»this media includes principally state and federal vocational education funds for high school districts, county subventions, and income from sale and rental of school property. The revenue receipts for the years 1950-51 through 1956-57 are presented in Table 38. In way of an extension and updating of the data covered in this table, over the 1957-61 period, the share of total California school revenues derived from federal aid amounted to less than 3. 5 110 TA BLE 38 PERCENTAGE OF GENERAL FUND REVENUES OF CALIFORNIA SCHOOL DISTRICTS, BY SOURCE 1950-51 TO 1956-57, ALL DISTRICTSa Y ear Local State F ederal Other 1950-51 54.0 41. 0 2. 0 3. 0 1951-52 53. 3 41. 3 2. 5 2.9 1952-53 52. 7 42.0 2. 6 2. 7 1953-54 47. 9 47. 5 2. 1 2. 5 1954-55 48. 2 47. 1 2.4 2. 2 1955-56 49. 2 46. 6 1.9 2. 3 1956-57 52. 3 43. 3 2. 1 2. 3 aData for years 1950-51 through 1956-57 from State Controller, Annual Report of Financial Transactions Covering School Districts of California, Fiscal Year, 1956-57. per cent; the share accounted for by state aid was about 35. 7 per cent. Over the same period, the property taxes collected by all school districts increased from the figure 52. 3 per cent to approx imately 57 per cent in 1961 (7 5:3). Over the period 1957-61 the percentage of total state and local taxes collected in California by school districts increased from about 20 per cent to nearly 23 per cent. This percentage increase I l l just about equaled the decline witnessed by the state's collected share of state and local taxes, a decline from nearly 50 per cent to 47 per cent. This turn of events reflects the relative amount of dependence that school districts have had to place on their major source of revenue, the property tax. This perforce is the case in order for school districts to bear the increasing costs of public edu cation alongside the declining share of public school costs provided by the state from its tax revenue sources (75:4). Property taxes, collected only by local governments, i . e . , school districts, cities, counties, and special districts, in 1957 accounted for approximately 45 per cent of all California state and local government tax collections; by 1962 property taxes in creased to nearly 49 per cent of all such collections. There are over 5, 000 local units empowered to levy the property tax in California. The property tax levies in California will approximate some two and one-half billion dollars in 1963; schools receive about half this amount; cities, counties, and special districts the other half (60:21). The largest share of the property taxes in California are collected by school districts, and this situation has been increasing. In 1957 property tax revenues accruing to school districts constituted about 45 per cent of all property taxes collected in the state; by 1961 112 this proportion increased to over 47 per cent. This condition in the main, is but a reflection of the rapid rise in costs of public schools and the declining share of the total of these costs borne by the state (75:5). Presented in different perspective, prior to 1930, the largest portion of the cost of education in California was borne by the locally levied property tax. In the first year of the depression, 72.4 per cent of all school district revenues were produced by local prop** erty taxes. In recent years the state of California has provided some 40 per cent of all school district funds, while the local property tax continues to supply the majority proportion of the total fiscal support for public education (5:155). Table 39 presents the relative im portance of the property tax as a revenue source for school districts for selected fiscal years between 1946-47 and 1960-61. Taxable wealth and some selected principles of taxation Although not specifically the province of this part of the study, the subject of ability-to-pay as related to "property taxation" and "income" occurs repeatedly in the literature. By virtue of this fact alone, the w riter felt obliged to briefly give cognizance to the fact that extended dissatisfaction with the property tax as a revenue source exists in the literature. It is, however, not the purpose of 113 T A B L E 39 PERCENTAGE OF AGGREGATE PUBLIC SCHOOL REVENUES, RECEIPTS FROM PROPERTY TAXES, 1946-47 TO 1960-6la Fiscal Year Property Tax Percentages 1946-47 61. 7 1949-50 55. 0 1952-53 54. 2 1955-56 50. 6 1959-60 55. 6 1960-61 54. 7 1962-63 (estimated) 57.9 Data for years 1946-47 through 1955-56 from John A. Vieg, California Local Finance, p. 156; for year 1959-60 from "Financing the Public Schools, 1960-1970," Special P roject on School Finance, N. E .A . , Washington, D, C, , 1962; and for years 1960-61 and 1962-63 from "Fact Sheet on Public School Finance in California" (mimeographed), C .A .S .A . , Burlingame, California, November 15, 1962. this discussion to defend or attack the property tax, but rather to m erely allude to some alternate considerations as conveyed in the literature. In essence, it appeared to be an impossibility to confine this study completely to the subject of property taxation without con veying a modicum of information relative to literature presentations 114 negative to this tax base. M easures of taxable wealth Taxes are paid by people and are accordingly related in some manner to the wealth of taxpayers. Therefore, taxes are based upon that aspect of wealth which m easures and/or determines the amount of tax on each payer. Broadly considered, taxes may be imposed on three principal types of wealth. One type is that of wealth-owned. Another, wealth^.cquired in way of income. A third, of wealth in action, i. e. , production, exchange and consumption (14:137). These three can be reasonably said to embrace all as pects of taxable wealth, and by which taxes may be m easured. It is not the design or intent of this study to develop the concept of wealth in its various form s, nor to prepare a treatise on the subject of taxation. However, by dint of their popularity in the literature, the w riter felt compelled to briefly treat two of the three types of wealth mentioned above, specifically wealth-owned and wealth as income, with a view to the subject of school support. Wealth-owned: taxes on property In essence, in this category, wealth may be regarded as things and rights owned. These things or rights have a given present 115 value. Imposed upon and in accordance with the value established is there assessed the so-called ad valorem tax on property. Such category of wealth, may be dichotomized, for tax purposes, not only in accordance with value, but also in accordance with any quantita tive m easure, i. e . , heads of cattle, bushels of grain, or number of automobiles. The problem, many tim es, inherent in this tax source is that the taxpayer may have no current income with which to pay the tax. In addition, the stability of the revenue accruing from this wealth medium is not absolute; for, where the assessed valuation shrinks, so, in consequence, does the revenue, unless tax rates are raised proportionately. Finally, in given taxing jurisdictions the difficulty of tax payments is of such moment for some taxpayers, that taxes in proportional amounts are unpaid (14:180). Wealth as income: taxes on incomes Wealth may also be m easured in accordance with current income. In turn taxes may be m easured according to either pro gressive or proportional rate schedules, by this source of wealth. This is best exemplified by the modern income tax, whether predi cated on individual or business income. The measuring stick of the income tax may be the person*s entire income from all sources, or his income from particular sources, or parts of his income 116 appropriately segregated. In essence, this wealth source is the income actually derived by stipulated rules during a preceding fiscal year. Comparison of wealth-owned and wealth as income The literature is replete with discussions, both practical and philosophical, regarding these sources of wealth and tax media. In fact, one can hardly select a text on the subject of finance without encountering some treatm ent of these tax bases. It is the purpose of this section to but m erely set forth a brief recapitulation of the literature presentations reviewed by the w riter on this subject. Income. --Taxes are paid with money. Ability to pay taxes is related m ore directly to money income than to property value--in form, the present value of future income. A m easure of income to individuals is a more direct m easure of ability to pay taxes than m easures based on what people spend, such as retail sales and automobile registrations. By definition, income is com* prised of (1) wages and salaries, (2) p ro p rieto rs income, (3) prop erty income, and (4) other income, which includes public assistance, benefits, allowances, and the like, largely from government sources. 117 Wealth-owned* ■"The tax base upon which local support for public schools depends is the net assessed valuation of property within the district* The ad valorem tax on property is the only means of any consequence that the school district has of providing local fiscal support of the schools comprising the district. Aside from the aspect of assessm ent practice, the property tax tends to be seriously regressive when related to the incomes of persons burdened with the tax. Although the tax itself is proportional in accordance with the tax base--assessed value--it nevertheless creates a disproportionate burden on lower income groups. As a case in point, the regressive nature of the property tax in the United States was established in the Musgrove study of the distribution of tax burdens by income class (69:1-53). Comparison. —Income and net assessed valuation, the two basic m easures of wealth, do not compare favorably in accordance with literature findings. The superiority of income as a m easure of actual ability to pay taxes is found principally in the fact that income represents "cash in hand" and taxes are paid with money. It is determined objectively, comprehensive and highly reliable because, in effect, it is a summation of payments of money actually made to individuals. The chief advantage of assessed valuation as a m easure 118 of wealth and a tax base is its avowed stability. Property is said to constitute the basis of the nation*s wealth. It is a fam iliar instru ment because of its long use. It can reach certain speculative and increasing paper values before they are reflected in income. The weaknesses of the property tax are numerously and widely heralded among authorities (10:62-73), A few examples will serve to illustrate. A ssessed valuation of property represents a theoretical as opposed to an actual tax base because it is not money. Property has to produce money before there is actual tax paying ability through its productivity, its sale or its use as security for credit. It places the direct burden on only part of the population, the property owners. The greater part of money income is in the form of salaries, wages, income from services, and the like. The fact that those who receive this type of income also have children raises the question of discrim ination. It is argued that those who do not own property participate only indirectly through payment of rents, which is true to a given degree, but the fact remains that the direct inci dence of the property tax is on only those who own property. The ad valorem system is inflexible and slow in respond ing to fluctuations in the level of income and cost (12:91-96). If valuations for taxation were based on actual values and were adjusted 119 to fluctuations of the economy, the criticism, of inflexibility would be largely overcome. Some selected principles of taxation. —Some of the more commonly accepted principles of taxation are discussed in this sec tion (1:50-95). The principles conveyed herein are not to be con strued as exhaustive, being principally representative of those most commonly encountered in the literature. Ability to pay. —This principle is virtually the most com monly encountered and accepted principle of taxation. In gist, the principle simply states that each individual should contribute to government support according to his respective ability. This defini tion creates a problem, however, when one contemplates the various possible approaches to the term "ability." If one accepts the owner ship of property, and thus wealth as property, as the best test of ability, then the property tax is the best ability medium. If one selects volume of spending as the best test of ability, then one must assume the sales tax to be the best tax. Finally, if one assumes income to be the valid criterion of ability, one m ust therefore cham pion the income tax as the best index of ability to pay. From the foregoing, one can come to defend any one of the three principal tax bases used in the United States on the ability-to-pay principle. Notwithstanding, the dichotomy in definitions of the 120 term "ability, " there is virtually uniform concurrence that taxation should be predicated on ability to pay. Adequacy of yield. --Local government services cannot be provided or function without adequate financing. By virtue of statu tory and constitutional provision, local governments must operate within the bounds of a fiscally balanced budget. The medium of deficit financing is purely a temporary course, the costs must event ually be met. Thus, tax sources must offer an adequate fiscal yield to insure the provision of essential governmental services. Directness and certainty. --The people, business, and corporations should be cognizant of the fact that they are subject to taxation, and further should be aware of the amount involved. This is fundamental in term s of planning on the part of all concerned. Hidden taxes should be avoided as such procedure may invite defec tive decisions as regards the provision of given government services. The factor of tax evasion should be combatted, to the extent that the government is probably and reasonably justified in a proportional expenditure of funds in parallel percentage to delinquent or evaded taxes to insure compliance, thereby advancing the principle of certainty. Economy of administration. —Tax collection costs in curred should be minimal. Everything being equal, the tax that is 121 collected most economically is obviously superior to the tax source which is expensive in its operation. In the instance wherein different levels of government are availing themselves of the identical tax base source, economy in the administration thereof can be effectively accomplished by the provision of a coordinated administration of such tax. As a case in point, county, city, and school districts can reduce administration costs in the property tax area by using the same tax collecting authority. Adaptability. --This principle favors flexibility in term s of nonrigidity on the rates and/or types of taxes that may be levied. A system of taxation is static if constitutional and other restrictions on tax rates and tax rate types obstruct local government from ad justing their respective revenue needs commensurate with desirable goYernmental services offered. Summary. —Certain basic generalizations can be made about wealth and criteria of taxation from this section: 1. Taxable wealth may be broadly defined to embrace three principal types: wealth-owned, wealth as income, and wealth-produced, exchanged, or consumed. 2. The property tax and the principle of ability- to-pay are not compatible. Such tax base is at most proportional in operation, i. e ., technically, such tax remains constant whether the base increases or decreases, and at worst regressive in nature, i. e ., the tax rate decreases as the base increases. The property tax produces a substantial amount of revenue, is relatively stable, and is rigid or nonadaptable in that it is subject to constitutional and statutory restrictions. The income tax is closely akin to the prin* ciple of ability*to~pay. The income tax in graduated form is progressive in nature, i. e#, the tax rate increases as the income base increases. The income tax yields large sums of money, but the yield lacks stability in that it fluctuates with the prevailing economy. The income tax is economical to administer, direct and certain, and adaptable. The m ore commonly encountered principles of taxation, convenient to utilize as criteria in entertaining the effectiveness and values in* herent in various forms of taxation are: 123 ability-to-pay, adequacy of yield, directness and certainty, economy of administration, and adaptability. These principles are appropriate to the subjects of apportioning the tax burden and administrative considerations in the selec tion of tax sources. Summary of the chapter This chapter has presented information relative to reve nue sources in support of public schools, and pertinent data on trends in such revenue, on a national scale and specific to the state of California. The purpose inherent in this presentation was to clearly establish the point that the property tax as a revenue source for support of public education is singularly most important on both the national and state levels. Despite abundant examples in the literature of sustained and severe criticism of the property tax, local governments are firmly entrenched in property taxation as a principal source of sup port, as evidenced by the data conveyed in this chapter. 1. Nationally, in the year 1954, about 53 per cent of the total public school revenue receipts from all sources were derived from property taxes. In that there has been little change in the percentage of revenue derived from state sources since 1949*50, the property tax percentage of total school revenues has probably continued through 1962-63. In the state of California, over the period 1957-61, property taxes collected by all school districts increased from 52.3 per cent to approximately 57 per cent in 1961. School districts in California realize the largest share of the property taxes collected in the state. In 1957 school districts realized about 45 per cent of all property taxes col lected; by 1961 this percentage had increased to over 47 per cent. Finally, when viewed from a percentage of the aggregate income accuring to school dis tricts in California, the yield from property taxes declined slightly over the period 1946-47 to 1962-63 (estimated) from 61.7 per cent to 57. 9 per cent, respectively. In spite of this decline, this source still stands as a principal 125 source of support for public schools in the state. The next chapter will convey a treatm ent of the subjects of property taxation, property valuation, and land*use. In this chap ter evidence derived from the literature is presented in support of the rationale of this part of the dissertation, namely, changes in "taxable w ealth"--assessed valuation--are a function of changes in land-us e. CHAPTER VIII PROPERTY TAXATION, PROPERTY VALUATION, AND LAND-USE The previous chapter presented information and data pertinent to sources of public school support, establishing the prime importance of the property tax as a revenue source. This chapter presents a discussion of property taxation provisions and property valuation procedure in California. In addition, the importance of zoning and land-use are presented, indi cating the affect thereof in the process of deriving a value conclusion by appraisers and thus establishing property value. Property Taxation in California Constitutional and statutory provisions governing property taxation Section 1 of Article XIII of the state Constitution sets forth the following provision: All property in the State except as otherwise in this Constitution provided, not exempt under the laws of the United States, shall be taxed in proportion to its 126 127 value, to be ascertained as provided by law, or as herein after provided. The word "property" as used in this article and section, is hereby declared to include moneys, credits, bonds, stocks, dues, franchises, and all other m atters and things, real, personal, and mixed, capable of private own ership. By statutory provision, two classes of property are expressly defined for tax purposes. The first class is real estate, or property, and in accordance with Section 104 of the Revenue and Taxation Code includes: (a) The possession of, claim to, ownership of, or right to the possession of land, (b) All mines, m inerals, and quarries in the land, all standing tim ber whether or not belonging to the owner of the land, and all rights and privileges appertaining thereto, (c) Improvements, defined in Section 105, include all build ings, structures, fixtures, and fences erected on or affixed to the land, except telephone and telegraph lines, and all fruit, nut-bearing, or ornamental trees and vines, not of natural growth, and not exempt from taxation, except date palms under eight years of age. Section 106 of the Revenue and Taxation Code defines the second class of property, personal property, as including all prop erty except real estate. Section 14 of Article XIII of the Constitution provides that: The Legislature shall have the power to provide for the assessm ent, levy, and collection of taxes upon all forms of tangible personal property, all notes, debentures, shares of capital stock, bonds, solvent cyedits, deeds of trust, 128 mortgages, and any legal or equitable interest therein, not exempt from taxation under the provisions of this Constitution, in such manner, and at such rates, as may be provided by law, and in pursuance of the exercise of such power the Legislature, two-thirds of all the m em bers elected to each of the two houses voting in favor thereof, may classify any and all kinds of personal prop erty for the purposes of assessm ent and taxation in a manner and at a rate or rates in proportion to value differ ent from any other property in the State subject to taxation and may exempt entirely from taxation any or all forms, types, or classes of personal property. The total tax imposed on notes, debentures, shares of capital stock, bonds, solvent credits, deeds of trust, mortgages and any legal or equitable interest therein in pursuance of the provisions of this section shall not be at a rate in excess of four-tenths of 1 per cent of the actual value of such property and no tax burden shall be imposed upon any personal property either tangible or intangible which shall exceed the tax burden on real property in the same taxing jurisdiction in proportion to the actual value of such property. Section III of the Revenue and Taxation Code defines intangible personal property to include only notes, debentures, shares of capital stock, bonds, solvent credits, deeds of trust, and mortgages. Article XIII, Section 14 of the Constitution provides, however, for the express exemption of notes, debentures, shares of capital stock, bonds, deeds of trust, mortgages, and any interest therein from taxation. Thus, in the state of California, only two kinds of intangible personal property are subject to ta x a tio n - solvent credits and franchises. 129 Provisions governing property tax administration Property assessment, property valuation for tax pur poses, is the core process in the administration of the property tax. There exist three agencies in California charged with the responsi bility for property assessm ent. These are the State Board of Equal ization, county assessors, and city assessors. Under Article Xlll, Section 14 of the state Constitution, the State Board of Equalization is responsible for assessing railroads, public utilities, and other properties. The assessm ent rolls derived are conveyed for purposes of taxation to the unit having tax jurisdic tion, the unit wherein such property is geographically located. The second agency, the fifty-eight county assessors, assess all other properties for county, school district, and most special districts. The third agency, city assessors, to a given extent engage in prop erty assessm ent within the confines of their respective taxing ju ris diction. It should be mentioned that by 1958, about two-thirds of California municipalities had established dependence upon county assessm ent and collection of their property taxes, a single a sse ss ment roll thus sufficing for both city and county property taxation purposes (5:177). In addition to the foregoing principal agencies, certain special districts also hold statutory power to render a sse ss ment rolls and collect their own taxes. 130 Property Tax Administration and the Basis for Property Valuation Introduction. —The subject of property taxation has been treated in the literature in vast array. In the course of reviewing the literature, it was found that although there exists a tremendously im pressive storehouse of literature on the topic, much of it is of a highly specialized nature, thus not existent in any one synthesized form. Most recent texts on the subject of taxation include a treat" ment of property taxation, but fall short of an exhaustive treatm ent of this tax. Continued reference to and subsequent study of Jens P. Jensenxs Property Taxation in the United States, published in 1931, aided the w riter immeasurably in his quest for an integrated present ation of the essential aspects of property taxation. This particular text is the result of a ten-year study of property taxation by the author (14:viii). His more recent publication, Government Finance, 1939, is also an excellent text on general principles of taxation, and was found to be quite valuable as a source in the course of pursuing this study. In the process of reviewing the literature, the w riter encountered a number of evaluative treatm ents and critiques on the property tax. Of the various and principal shortcomings encountered in the literature, the one singularly of importance to this study is 131 that of its "administrative shortcomings, 1 1 specifically the establish ment of property value. Thus, sole subsequent emphasis will be placed on this topic. Property assessm ent and the value basis for property taxation. —In the sphere of taxation the concept of value is a funda mental economic problem. The property tax is levied on the assessed value of the property subject to taxation in accordance with prescribed rules and regulations. Functionally considered then, the tax base is the established "taxable value" of the property to be taxed. There are several constitutional phrases that pertain to "value, " most of which are found in Article XIII* In Section 12, A rticle XI, it is provided that "All property subject to taxation shall be assessed for taxation at its full cash value." Section 1, Article XIII prescribes that all property be taxed "in proportion to its value. " Section 9, Article XIII, relative to state and county boards of equalization, requires that assessm ents be increased or decreased by such boards in conformance ". . . to the true value in money . . . . " Section 14 of A rticle XLLI, treating the assessm ent of utilities and other properties, prescribes that property shall be assessed "at the actual value of such property. " Considered in over-view then, the Constitution indicates that property shall be assessed at 132 (1) full cash value; (2) in proportion to its value; (3) true value in money; and (4) actual value. Article XI, Section 12 of the state Constitution further prescribes that "All property subject to taxation shall be assessed at its full cash value. " The prescription "full cash value" is defined in Section 110, Revenue and Taxation Code, to mean; "Value, full cash value, or cash value means the amount at which property would be taken in payment of a just debt from a solvent debtor, " In accordance with a recent case, De L.uz Homes, Inc. v. County of San Diego (45 A. C. No. 20), the California Supreme Court further explained and clarified the definition by expressing the following: It provides, in other words, for an assessm ent at the price that property would bring to its owner if it were offered for sale on an open market under conditions in which neither buyer nor seller could take advantage of the exigencies of the other. It is a measure of desirability translated into money amounts and might be called the m arket value of property for use in its present condition. Thus, from the above discussion and definitions pre sented, the basis of value for assessm ent purposes has been clearly established as "full cash value," and further has established "market value" as the fundamental guide in the estimation of such value (5:191). Therefore, property taxation in California, as set forth in the Constitution, the Revenue and Taxation Code, and as ex- 133 pressed in court decisions interpreting constitutional and statutory provisions, is subject to legal circum scription. Considered in toto, these sources provide the legal guidelines for property evaluation in the field of property taxation (5:191). Accordingly, the appraiser in the assessm ent process is confronted with the necessity of carefully analyzing all available data in order to arrive at "m arket value" in establishing value (46:5-6). The Concept and Meaning of Property Value The property tax is levied on the value of the property subject to taxation, the value, per se, being a function of constitu tional, statutory, and legal provisions. In taxation, the property owner is obliged to pay taxes predicated on the taxable value of his property. In the field of taxation, "m arket value" is accepted as the standard applicable to most types of property (4:462). The term "m arket value" has come to mean, in turn, the price the property would bring in an open m arket, in a free sale between a willing buyer and a willing seller (71:5). This situation reduces itself to a case of estimating the value of property, requiring the assesso r to exercise value judgment as to the taxable value of property. This condition prevails in that on assessm ent day not all property is bought and sold, 134 thereby establishing value. The taxing authority, perforce, cannot wait for sales to occur before levying taxes for if this were done, many properties would escape taxation because their value had not been established by the sale medium. Thus, the general property tax could be and is reasonably described as an ad valorem tax, the "value" of the property being established "as of" the day designated for assessm ent. In actuality, however, all property is not assessed on this specified day; the value is set at what it was "as of" that day. Again, an exercise of value judgment, however sophisticated, on the part of the assessor. Market value. --The use and meaning of this term has come as an outgrowth of many court decisions. In the course of sub stantial amounts of litigation, the courts have used such term s of definition as "cost and price, " "full knowledge, " "highest price, " and "willing buyer and seller, " to mention but a few. In practice, the courts lean heavily on precedent established in earlier cases to settle disputes. In a study embracing a period of nearly five years, Hanson (67:289-97) pursued an analytical study of Supreme Court decisions in the several states in an effort to interpret their mean ing. This study included several hundred cases dealing with the term "m arket value. " 135 The cases cited below do not exhaust the cases reviewed, but do suffice to cast light on the approach and analysis rationale pursued by the courts. In accordance with Hanson (67:63-65), the decisions rendered are typical of leading cases in the several states and may be safely utilized as guides. Sacramento Southern R. R. Co. v. Heilbron (156 Cal. 408). "Market Value is the highest price estimated in term s of money which the land will bring if exposed for sale on the open market, with a reasonable time allowed to find a purchaser, buying with full know ledge of all the uses and purposes to which it is adapted, and for which it is capable of being used. " Seaboard Airline Ry. Co. v. Chamblin (108 Va. 42; 60 S. E. 727). "In estimating Market Value of property value, all capabilities of the property and all uses to which it may be applied are to be considered, " M ississippi & c B. R. R. Co. v. Patterson (98 U. S. 403). "The inquiry in such cases must be, what is the property worth in the market, viewed not m erely with reference to the uses to which it is applied, but with reference to the uses to which it is plainly adapted. " City of Los Angeles v. Hughes (202 Cal. 731). "The base for computing the m arket value of land where its suitability for subdivision purposes is established, is its value, plus any increased value it may have in the m arket by reason of its suitability for subdivision into city lots, and not on the basis of what the owners would be able to obtain for the lots after subdivision had actually taken place . . . Subdivision possibility, but not as an actuality. " C. C. C. 8t St. L . v. Backus (U. S. Court, May 26, 1894). (Opinion of Chief Justice Brewer) "The value of property results from the use to which it is put, and varies with the profitableness of that use, present and prospective, 136 actual, and anticipated. There is no pecuniary value outside of that which results from such use. The amount and profit* able character of such use determines its value.1 1 Hanson (67:65-66) summarized the several decisions into their component legal elements, presenting those generally accepted legal elements that define m arket value. Among the series of ele ments discerned, it is of particular interest to note the one term ed "Condition of U se." In this particular category, the legal element extracted deals with the use conditions of property in establishing m arket value. In the author*s treatm ent of this category he made particular reference to the procedure followed wherein m arket value is fixed by its present use condition as best exemplified in the case of taxpayers. It is well recognized that property is capable of alternate uses depending on a number of given circum stances. For example, land may be developed for use as an apartment, service station, single-family residence, orchard, or retail store. The United States Supreme Court in Cleveland C. C. and St. L< . Ry. Co. v. Backus, 154 U. S. 445 (1894), said: ". . . the value of property results from the use to which it is put and varies with the profitableness of that use . . • • There is no pecuniary value outside of that which results from such use. The amount and profitable character of such use determine the value and if property is taxed at its actual cash value it is taxed upon something which is created by the uses to which it is put. " 137 This opinion emphasizes the importance of land-use. Usually, this is the present use (46:34). It is evident that appraisers, in making an appraisal, m ust appraise on the basis of some use or uses. In the appraisal of real property, the use or uses considered are based upon the exist ing ownership or use of land. The existing ownership and use pattern are the results of the actions of the m arket. It is not proper to ig nore the results of the m arket (46:35-37). Thus, in the instance of real property, the establishment of the assessed value and thereby taxable value of such property may be considered to be the function of existing, actual land-use; improb able use or uses cannot serve as the basis of the appraisal; the use is the most profitable use for the total property—land and improve ments as a unit; and, the use for appraisal purposes is a legal use (46:39). Land»use and zoning. --The economic affect of taxation on land value and land utilization is generally known. One of fairly recent historic origin requires particular comment in this study, namely, zoning--the legal use of property as indicated in the fore going section. Historically, the very beginning of zoning in the United States can be traced back to 1892 when regulations governing the 138 heights of buildings were adopted in Boston, About 1910, Los Angeles adopted regulations governing the location of certain commercial uses (58:2). As a result of court decisions, there have evolved a num ber of general principles of zoning law which are universally accepted. These include (58:2-3): 1, Zoning must serve a public purpose related to health, safety, m orals, convenience, or general welfare, 2, Zoning conveys no vested rights to the indivi dual property owner since, under the police power, the interests of the community are paramount, 3, The police power is a flexible instrument which, although due legislative action, and, to some extent, judicial determination, can be adjusted and expanded to meet the new and changing conditions of society at any given time; always, however, within the limitation of reasonableness. 4, The regulations m ust be comprehensive and reasonable, rather than arbitrary or capricious. 5, The power to regulate is limited by both constitutional provisions and legislative delegation of authority. In the sphere of police power, three principal elements stand forth in the field of zoning. These are: (1) health, (2) m orals, and (3) public welfare. As expressed in the literature, it appears reasonably evident that few seriously contested court cases concern themselves with the effect of zoning on "health'1 or "m orals. " How ever, the third element, "public welfare, " appears frequently as a principal source of litigation. In the instance of court cases revolv ing about the element "public welfare, " the cases oftentimes reduce themselves to economic term s, specifically concerned with three factors: 1. The effect of proposed zoning on the market value and marketability of the property itself. 2. The effect of proposed zoning on adjacent properties and surrounding property in the area. 3. The effect of proposed zoning on the entire given community. 140 It is of particular interest to note in the case of the first factor listed above that most courts are not influenced by the fact that property values may fluctuate due to zoning classification. Ex* ceptions to this general statement may occur only if the economic differential is so substantial as to appear confiscatory, or if the affect of proposed zoning will reduce an individuals property value in half or more (58:5). In addition to the foregoing point, it is of particular moment to entertain the ramifications of the fact that zoning has a tendency to stabilize land use which, in turn, results in a "fixing of value" (35:111). Functionally, in the case of rezoning, which does occur, zoning authorities consider the needs of the community. A given property use will usually not be considered or approved that, in the opinion of the zoning authorities, would adversely affect su r rounding areas (46:37). Thus, the literature paves the way for two reasonable assumptions in the case of this study: (1) the courts, in general, are not influenced by problematic fluctuations in property values due to zoning practices, and (2) land use tends to become static, and value fixed, when zoning occurs. The implications of this second point is particularly important when considering the factor of property valu ation and existing use, as discussed in the previous section. 141 S u m m a ry of the ch ap ter Given summary statements can be derived from this chapter, which lend support to the design and format of Section I of the questionnaire utilized in this study, to be treated subsequently in Chapter IV. 1. Constitutional requirem ents, statutory provision and court interpretation have established the guidelines for property valuation in the field of taxation. 2. In the field of public taxation, the "m arket value" concept is the value standard applied to most types of property. 3. In the application of the concept of m arket value, the value conclusion arrived at by the appraiser is, at best, a subjective opinion. In the specific instance of the assesso r as a functionary, albeit bringing to bear a high degree of technical and theoretical competency, the process of property valuation reduces itself essentially to one of subjective value judgment in the last analysis. 4. Market value in the field of public taxation is predicated principally on the basis of existing 142 "property use. " 5. The courts are generally not influenced by property valuation fluctuations as an outgrowth of zoning assignments by zoning authorities, unless such zoning assignments create extreme economic problems for property owners. 6. The application of zoning has a tendency to stabilize land-use, thereby resulting in a fixing of value. The following chapter will describe the method, proce dure, and technique by which the study and research were conducted. C H A P T E R IX JUSTIFICATION OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE AND SAMPLE OBTAINED The preceding chapters were designed to create a pat terned approach to this chapter of P a rt HI of the dissertation, advanc ing logically from the general to the specific, all within the confines of the area of the study undertaken. The present chapter brings into focus method, procedure, and technique followed in pursuing the study. Establishment of C riteria for the Problem In order to derive the best available criteria pertinent to those economic factors within school districts that would account for established taxable wealth per pupil changes witnessed in growth districts in California, an analysis was made of the information conveyed in the literature and related investigations covered in this part of the study. From the data accumulated through this analysis, land-use criteria were established which might be applied to the 143 144 solution of the problem of the investigation. Validation of the criteria was assumed from the sources, which were composed en tirely of writers and persons of recognized professional standing. In addition, the criteria selected were cross-validated with practitioners and experts in the fields of taxation and economics in an effort to insure complete coverage; suggested changes and pertinent additions were appropriately incorporated in Section I of the questionnaire. Construction of the questionnaire In order to obtain the data sought in Section 1, changes in land-use witnessed by growth districts over the fifteen-year period 1945— 46 to 1960-61 to ascertain thereby their respective change in taxable wealth per pupil-«assessed valuation per ADA--it was neces sary to construct a questionnaire. Section I was combined with Sections II and III of the questionnaire (shown in Appendix C) in a joint effort to obtain data on selected economic and sociological factors accompanying established changes in wealth and growth witnessed in growth school districts. Section I of the questionnaire required the respondents to check land-use changes that occurred in their respective school dis trict to account for the increased assessed valuation experienced during the fifteen-year period 1945-46 to 1960-61. 145 Section II of the questionnaire had a twofold purpose. F irst, it was intended to secure the most significant economic opera tions currently engaged in within the boundaries of the respondents school district. Second, it requested information relative to the most significant economic operations, within and outside the respondents school district boundaries, that provide employment for the working residents of their respective school district. Section III of the questionnaire concerned itself with selected sociological factors that occurred concomitant with the growth pattern experienced in the respondents school district over the fifteen-year period 1945-46 to 1960-61. The questionnaire was submitted to a group of superin tendents and assistant superintendents, and to several other of the investigators* associates functioning in school administration, county planning commissions, county right-of-way departments, county assesso r offices, and planning consultants. These individuals were asked to peruse the questionnaire from the viewpoint of their own districts or for systems with which they were acquainted. Each person was asked to examine the instrument for clarity, conciseness, ease of response, misleading characteristics, or omissions, and to indicate changes or additions. The investigators made notes of the suggestions offered. The questionnaire was finally revised to 146 include several of the pertinent suggestions, and was reproduced in final form. Each of the questionnaires were coded (see Appendix C) for purposes of identification by county, type of district, district name, and responses to the factors delineated. The questionnaires in the proper course of events, were appropriately treated by data processing equipment, yielding the data presented in the study. Section I of the questionnaire The list of land-use change categories presented in Section 1 of the questionnaire were developed by reference to lite ra ture sources and as an outgrowth of the initial submission of the instrument to various personnel, as discussed above. Distribution of the questionnaire The study was co-sponsored by the California Association of Public School Business Officials. The investigators were most appreciative of the cooperation extended them by the association, being particularly indebted to Dr. S. C. Joyner, Business Manager, Los Angeles City Schools, for his efforts on behalf of this d isserta tion. The questionnaire was accompanied by a letter of tran s m ittal of the California Association of Public School Business 147 Officials, signed by Dr. S. C. Joyner (Appendix D), addressed to the superintendent of each 412 growth districts, as defined in Chapter I of P art II of the study. The questionnaire was accompanied by a self* addressed, stamped return envelope. Tabulation and treatm ent of the data No tabulations were made until the deadline requested for receipt of the questionnaires had passed, as set forth in the letter of transm ittal (Appendix D). A careful scrutiny of each returned questionnaire, however, was conducted in order to ascertain the completeness and reasonableness of the responses. The questionnaire was so designed as to leave little room for misunderstanding. In an effort to reduce the factor of erro r, written answers were eliminated by requiring respondents to simply check (/> their answers to the questions posed. The final tabulation was composed of 188 California school districts. This represented a 45 per cent return from the districts to which copies of the questionnaire were sent. The percentage return experienced, as viewed by the investigators, dictated that a statistical determination of the rep re sentativeness of the sample be obtained. To establish how represent ative the sample of the population, the null hypothesis was advanced 148 that "there is no difference in the means between the sample and the population.1 1 To test the hypothesis asserted, the param eters of the population were statistically established and compared with the obtained mean of the sample utilizing the "standard e rro r of the difference between uncorrelated means" formula (9:213-17). The level of significance deemed acceptable by the investigators in this study was established at a critical ratio (CR) of less than . 05. The calculations pursued resulted in critical ratios (CR’s) of less than 1.96 at the elementary, high school, and unified levels, and for all levels combined, apropos of both the economic factors of wealth and the sociological factors of growth. Thus, the null hypothesis advanced was retained at the .01 level for all levels encompassed by the study on the grounds that not more than once in 100 trials would a difference in the size obtained a ris e —if the true difference were zero. Summary of the chapter This chapter presented information relative to the estab lishment of the criteria utilized in P a rt III of the study, thereby indicating a justification of the format and construction of the ques tionnaire instrument, as well as a justification of the sample return obtained in the study. 149 The preceding chapters were intended to systematically develop and thus establish the validity of and rationale for the various land-use categories delineated in the questionnaire. By the use of such land-use categories, it was the design to thereby discern what particular land-use changes had occurred over the period 1945-46 to 1960-61 among growth districts. The land-use changes obtained would then be reviewed in an effort to account for the respective changes in taxable wealth per pupil--assessed valuation per A D A - observed in P art II of the dissertation. The following chapter presents a summary of the findings realized from Section I of the questionnaire, Economic Factors. The statistical data will be appropriately presented in table form, along with an explanation of the statistical technique employed to obtain the findings set forth. C H A P T E R X SUMMARY OF FINDINGS: PART III In the first chapter of this part of the study, the state ment of the purpose included certain questions revolving about land- use changes witnessed by growth districts over the period 1945-46 through 1960-61. It was stated that answers would be sought to these questions. An analysis of the data obtained from the questionnaire returns necessitated the use of the chi-square statistical technique. The statistical information conveyed by the questionnaire returns failed to assum e a normal curve of distribution, thereby inviting the use of a suitable nonparametric technique. A series of conferences with recognized authorities on the staff of the School of Education of the University of Southern California supported the use of this statis tical approach to the treatm ent of the data. This chapter presents a summary of the findings in P art III of the study, Selected Economic Factors Related to the Financial Support of Public Schools in California. The findings will be p re sented pursuant to a restatem ent of the questions posed in Chapter VI. 150 151 What particular land-use changes occurred among the growth dis tricts selected for study over the period 1945-46 through 1960-61? A summary of the responses to the land-use change categories delineated in the questionnaire (see Appendix C) is found in Table 40. 1. Questions 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 12, by observation, presented an interesting proportion of responses. The proportion was determined by a percentage ’’absent" or "present" in the particular land- use category. Here the percentage "present" were determined to be 90. 43, 52. 66, 70. 74, 55.32, 37.23, and 35.64, respectively. 2. The remaining responses in over-view appeared to offer little insight in term s of a statistical significance probability. A summary of the land-use category percentages "absent" or "present" is found in Table 41. The purpose inherent in this particular approach was to attempt to obtain further direction for statistical treatm ent of the data. In this effort, the investigator utilized the information realized from data processing equipment, as indicated in Chapter IV. By appropriate tabulation procedure, the 152 T A B L E 40 SUMMARY OF THE RESPONSES BY GROWTH DISTRICTS TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE, 130 ELEMENTARY DISTRICTS, 33 HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICTS, 25 UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTS, TOTAL OF 188 DISTRICTS Question None Less 1/3 Between _ - ... _ 1/3 2/3 ° v e r 2 / 3 A11 T°tal 6 18 52 69 46 3 188 7 89 95 4 0 0 188 8 56 116 16 0 0 188 9 84 85 16 3 0 188 10 118 65 4 1 0 188 11 142 45 1 0 0 188 12 121 61 5 1 0 188 13 126 60 2 0 0 188 14 155 32 0 1 0 188 15 163 24 0 1 0 188 16 173 15 0 0 0 188 17 184 4 0 0 0 188 18 179 9 0 0 0 188 19 165 22 1 0 0 188 20 179 9 0 0 0 188 21 179 9 0 0 0 188 22 168 18 1 0 1 188 153 T A B L E 41 SUMMARY OF RESPONSES BY GROWTH DISTRICTS BY PERCENTAGE OF LAND-USE CATEGORY "ABSENT OR "PRESENT" 72 Growth Districts Question Decrease from -1. 597 to -91.971 "Absent" P e r Cent "Present" P e r Cent 6 19 26.39 53 73. 61 7 30 41.67 42 58. 33 8 16 22. 22 56 77. 78 9 32 44. 44 40 55. 56 10 36 50. 00 36 50. 00 11 53 73.61 19 26. 39 12 54 75. 00 18 25. 00 13 51 70.83 21 29. 17 14 60 83.33 12 16. 67 15 64 88.89 8 11. 11 16 65 90. 28 7 9. 72 17 69 95.83 3 4. 17 18 67 93.06 5 6.94 19 64 88.89 8 11. 11 20 69 95.83 3 4. 17 21 67 93.06 5 6.94 22 63 87. 50 9 12. 50 T A B L E 4 1 --C o n tin u ed 154 116 Growth Districts Question Increase from "0" to +333.693 "Absent" P er Cent "Present" P er Cent 6 15 12.93 101 87. 07 7 60 51. 72 56 48. 28 8 38 32.76 78 67. 24 9 49 42. 24 67 57. 76 10 82 70.69 34 29.31 11 88 75.86 28 24. 14 12 67 57. 76 49 42.24 13 75 64. 66 41 35. 34 14 94 81. 03 22 18.97 15 99 85. 34 17 14.66 16 108 93. 10 8 6.90 17 115 99. 14 1 . 86 18 112 96.55 4 3. 45 19 100 86. 21 16 13.79 20 110 94. 83 6 5.17 21 112 96. 55 4 3.45 22 106 91.38 10 8. 62 155 T A B L E 4 1 --C o n tin u e d 118 Growth Districts Question Increase from -91.971 to +333.693 "Absent" P er Cent "Present" P er Cent 6 18 9. 57 170 90.43 7 89 47. 34 99 52. 66 8 55 29.26 133 70.74 9 84 44. 68 104 55. 32 10 118 62.77 70 37. 23 11 142 75. 53 46 24. 47 12 121 64. 36 67 35.64 13 126 67. 02 62 32.98 14 155 82.45 33 17. 55 15 163 86.70 25 13. 30 16 173 92. 02 15 7.98 17 184 97.87 4 2. 13 18 179 95.21 9 4.79 19 170 90.43 18 9.57 20 179 95.21 9 4.79 21 179 95.21 9 4.79 22 168 89. 36 20 10. 64 156 188 growth districts, witnessing changes in assessed valuation per ADA ranging from a -91.971 per cent decrease to a +333.693 per cent increase over the period 1945-46 through 1960-61, were dichotomized into (1) those growth districts suffering a decrease in assessed valuation per ADA over the fifteen-year period; (2) those growth districts realizing an increase in assessed valuation per ADA over the fifteen-year period; and (3) a synthesis of the entire 188 growth districts, 1. Questions 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 12, again, by observation presented interesting proportions along a continuum from "decrease" to "increase, " and land-use categories "absent" or "present. " The significance of this state ment will be more apparent in the chi-square table presentations below. 2. The remaining responses delineated appeared to offer minimum to but slight probability in term s of statistical treatm ent. Does the appearance or absence of these selected economic facto rs-- land-use changes--among the growth districts studied account for the discerned upward or downward trends in assessed valuation per ADA? 157 A summary of chi-square calculations, conveying the relationship between the variables of per cent of land-use change and change in assessed valuation per ADA is found in Table 42. When the chi-square calculation results conveyed in Table 42 were weighed, in conjunction with the null hypotheses tested in each consideration, the following findings were obtained. 1. In Question 6 (all districts), P = ^ . 0 1 established the significance of the land-use change category, "Agriculture-Open Space to Single Family Residential, " with a view to causation of decrease in assessed valuation per ADA. 2. Although recognized, in general, that one may safely discard a null hypothesis when P is .05 or less (9:255), it nevertheless is of some significance to note in Question 6 the obtained P*s for "all districts" and "decrease districts" of < .01 and ^ . 3 0 , respectively, when viewed in opposition to P = ^ . 70 in the case of "increase d istric ts." This circumstance tends to offer some additional support for the signifi cance of the land-use change category, "To 158 T A B L E 42 SUMMARY OF CHI-SQUARES BETWEEN CHANGE IN LAND-USE CATEGORY AND CHANGE IN ASSESSED VALUATION PER ADA Question df 2 X P 6 (all districts) 8 28. 77 < . 01 6 (decrease districts) 6 7. 83 < . 30 6 (increase districts) 9 8. 13 < . 70 7 (all districts) 4 6. 77 < .2 0 7 (decrease districts) 3 3. 77 < .3 0 7 (increase districts) 3 4. 15 < .3 0 8 (all districts) 4 8. 53 < . 10 8 (decrease districts) 3 5. 79 < .2 0 8 (increase districts) 3 14. 55 < .0 1 9 (all districts) 4 2. 05 < .8 0 9 (decrease districts) 3 .46 < .9 5 9 (increase districts) 3 4. 05 < .3 0 10 (all districts) 4 13.04 < .0 2 10 (decrease districts) 3 1. 32 < . 80 10 (increase districts) 3 4. 49 < . 30 11 (all districts) 4 1. 28 < .9 0 11 (decrease districts) 3 1.34 < .8 0 11 (increase districts) 3 6.42 < . 10 T A B L E 4 2 --C o n tin u e d 159 Question d f 2 X P 12 {all districts) 4 9.14 < . 10 12 (decrease districts) 3 1.50 o • V 12 (increase districts) 3 3. 78 < . 30 13 (all districts) 4 .53 > .9 3 13 (decrease districts) 3 1. 26 < .8 0 13 (increase districts) 3 4. 02 < . 30 14 (all districts) 4 3. 17 < . 50 14 (decrease districts) 3 . 80 < .9 0 14 (increase districts) 3 4.73 < .2 0 15 (all districts) 4 2.43 <.70 15 (decrease districts) 3 2. 24 < .70 15 (increase districts) 3 . 18 > .9 5 16 (all districts) 4 3. 21 < . 70 16 (decrease districts) 3 1. 72 < .70 16 (increase districts) 3 3. 23 < . 50 17 (all districts) 4 1.94 <.80 17 (decrease districts) 3 2. 31 < . 70 17 (increase districts) 3 2.24 < .7 0 18 18 18 19 19 19 20 20 20 21 21 21 22 22 22 T A B L E 4 2 --C o n tin u ed Question df x (all districts) 4 2. 30 (decrease districts) 3 1.10 (increase districts) 3 4. 22 (all districts) 4 7.07 (decrease districts) 3 1. 10 (increase districts) 3 4. 22 (all districts) 4 1.14 (decrease districts) 3 2.31 (increase districts) 3 3.32 (all districts) 4 2.30 (decrease districts) 3 1.10 (increase districts) 3 4.22 (all districts) 4 5.49 (decrease districts) 3 2.69 (increase districts) 3 2.18 Single Family Residential, " in accounting for witnessed decreases in assessed valuation per ADA, m ost dramatically expressed by the so-called "bedroom community. " In Question 8 (increase districts), P = 01 indicates the relative significance of the land- use change category, "Agriculture-Open Space to Commercial, " in establishing accountability for increase in assessed valuation per ADA. Again, the obtained P = 10 in Question 8 (all districts) remains singularly of question able significance statistically. But, when considered in combination with P = 01 (increase districts) and in contrast with the P = ^ .2 0 (decrease districts), some minimal reenforcement of the finding under paragraph 3 above appears to be warranted. In Question 10 (all districts), P = ^ .0 2 conveys significance in term s of the contribution of the land-use change category, "Agriculture- Open Space to Public Utility, " to the factor of increase in assessed valuation per ADA. F u r- 162 ther, when weighed in parallel with the P = < .30 (increase districts), a degree of strength is added to the finding. 6. In Question 12 (all districts), although the P = <. 10 obtained is singularly of question able significance, but when compared with the P = <.30 (increase districts) and con trasted with the P = <.70 (decrease districts), a degree of significance can be ascribed to the contribution of this land-use change category to the factor of increasing assessed valuation per ADA. 7. In the findings expressed in Question 14, "Single Family Residential to Industrial, " the resultant P = <.20 (increase districts) and P = <.50 (all districts), contrasted with the P = < .90 (decrease districts), are merely suggestive of the significance of this category*s contribution to increased assessed valuation. 8. The remaining findings expressed in Table 42 were considered to be comparatively insignifi cant statistically, not truly worthy of treatm ent 163 or discussion. In an effort to cross-validate and perhaps intensify the chi-square results realized in Table 42, the investigator treated further the data through the medium of combining question-responses among the various land-use change categories. In this process care was taken to combine like land-use "changes, " in the interest of r e taining validity. The procedure pursued was reviewed with authori ties at the University of Southern California to insure the feasibility and correctness of this technique. A summary of the results of this approach is found in Table 43. The question-combinations treated have indicated there after the land-use change category concerned in the interest of clarity. The chi-square calculations reflected in Table 43 were appropriately reviewed with the null hypotheses tested in each instance. The following findings were obtained. 1. The question-combination 8-13-15-22, in aggregation representing the land-use change, "To Commercial, " resulted in a P = 01 (increase districts). This result, when com pared with the chi-square results obtained in Table 42 above, specific to Question 8 (increase TA BLE 43 SUMMARY OF CHI-SQUARES BETWEEN CHANGE IN LAND-USE CATEGORY AND CHANGE IN ASSESSED VALUATION PER ADA Question Combinations Land-Use Change df 2 X P 6-17-20 (increase districts) f "To Single Family Residential" 3 6.89 < .05 6-17-20 (decrease districts) "To Single Family Residential" 3 4.22 <.20 7-12-18-21 (increase districts) "To Multiple Family Residential" 3 8.08 <.05 7-12-18-21 (decrease districts) "To Multiple Family Residential" 3 .28 >.95 9-14-16-19 (increase districts) "To Industrial" 3 4.83 < . 10 9-14-16-19 (decrease districts) "To Industrial" 3 .64 >.80 8-13-15-22 (increase districts) "To Commercial" 3 20.56 <.01 8-13-15-22 (decrease districts) "To Commercial" 3 .16 >.95 8-9 (increase districts) "Agriculture-Open Space to Commercial-Industrial'1 3 6.05 o • V 8-9 (decrease districts) "Agriculture-Open Space to C omm e r cial-Indu s trial'1 3 1.32 >.70 8-9-13-14-15-16 (increase districts) "To Commercial-Industrial" 3 3.88 <.30 8-9-13-14-15-16 (decrease districts) "To Commercial-Industrial" 3 2.39 <.50 O ' districts), and Question 13 (increase districts), is singularly significant. However, considering the P scores conveyed in Table 42 apropos of the question-combination, only Questions 8 and 13 appear to be statistically supportive; Questions 15 and 22 conveying inconclusive chi-squares. Nevertheless, contrasting the question-combina tion 8-13-15-22 (increase districts) with the question-combination 8-13-15-22 (decrease dis tricts) yielding P scores of ^ . 01 and 95, respectively, the significance of the contribution to increased assessed valuation per ADA of the land-use change "To Commercial" is given support. The question-combination 7-12-18-21, treating the land-use change category, "To Multiple Family Residential," presented P scores of ^ .0 5 (in crease districts) and ^ .9 5 (decrease districts), respectively. Reviewing Table 42 specific to the individually treated questions 7, 12, 18, and 21, the recurrent P = 30 (increase districts) suggests some support for the relative contribu- tion of the land-use change, "To Multiple Family Residential, " to increased assessed valuation per ADA, It is recognized that a P score of <• 30 is considered statistically insignificant, per se. However, when weighed against the contrasting results of the question- combination P scores of <■ 05 (increase districts) and ^.,95 (decrease districts), and the uniform P score of <• 30 for each question treated singularly in Table 42 the evidence, in toto, is reasonably supportive. The question-combination 8-9, "Agriculture- Open Space to Commercial-Industrial, " resulted in a P score of <. 20 (increase districts) and ^>.70 (decrease districts), respectively. Again, a P = < . 20 considered alone is generally conceded to be statistically insignificant. But, when considered in parallel with the P scores obtained for Questions 8 (increase districts) and 9 (increase districts) in Table 42, <.01 and <.30, respectively, and in contrast to the P = ^ • 70 (decrease districts) in the case of the combination- questions 8-9 in Table 43, the importance of the contribution of the land-use change category, "To Commercial-Indus trial, " to the factor of increased assessed valuation per ADA assumes reasonable significance. The question-combination 9-14-16-19, "To Industrial, " resulted in P scores of ^.10 (increase districts) and ^ . 8 0 (decrease dis tricts). Reviewing the P scores derived for each question in Table 42, Questions 9 (increase districts) and 14 (increase districts), with P scores of <• 30 and 20, were the only ones that lend some strength to the combination- question finding. Viewing the contrasting combination-question P scores obtained, the relative contribution of the land-use change category, "To Industrial, " to increased assessed valuation per ADA, is reasonably supportive. Finally, the combination-questions 6-17-20, "To Single Family Residential," and 8-9-13- 14-15-16, "To Com mercial-Industrial, " 168 presented in Table 43 convey P scores m erely suggestive of their respective effects on the factor of assessed valuation per ADA. The differential P scores realized in the instance of these combination-questions, when compared to the P scores delineated in Table 42 apropos of each question treated separately, suggests the possibility that the statistic on each combi nation-question was subject to gross negative saturation. This positibn appears reasonable when the statistical contribution obtained in Tables 40 and 41 above were reviewed in parallel to each of the questions combined in Table 43. Specifically, the responses reflected in Table 41 toQuestions 9, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 20, respectively, indicate substantially large "absent" percentages in the case of the land-use categories represented. Further support for this contention is evidenced when Table 40 is reviewed, apropos of the relative proportion of questionnaire responses checked as "none" to the land-use change categories 169 pursued in the combination-question treatm ents. Could a "land-use model1 1 be obtained from the investigation that might be utilized for predictive pur poses, for the benefit of current and future growth districts in California? The information related and statistical results conveyed under Question 2 above indicated the relative effect of given land-use change categories on the factor of changes in taxable wealth per A D A --assessed valuation per ADA. Viewed as a totality, the evidence collected in this part of the study points up the relative importance of given land-use changes and the effect thereof on growth districts specific to the factor of increase or decrease in assessed valuation per ADA. Land-use changes to (1) Multiple Family Residential, (2) Commercial, (3) Industrial, (4) Public Utility, and as expressed in Table 43 in various land-use change category combinations, tend to favor the factor of increase in assessed valuation per ADA. In contrast, the land-use change, "Agriculture-Open Space to Single Family Residential, " Question 6, Table 42, tends to favor the factor of decrease in assessed valuation per ADA, Synthesizing the evidence reflected in Tables 40, 41, 42, and 43 above, it appears reasonable to state that the "land-use 170 change" data reflected therein suggests that if proportional gains are witnessed by the same growth districts in the categories (1) Multiple Family Residential, (2) Commercial, (3) Industrial, and (4) Public Utility, there would accrue in all probability a proportional increase in wealth per ADA—assessed valuation per ADA. The reverse would probably occur if the same growth districts realize, subsequent to the period embraced by this study, a proportional increase in land- use change, "Agriculture-Open Space to Single Family Residential," Finally, it must be held that the evidence gathered in this part of the study fails to lend itself to the unequivocal develop ment of a "land-use model" for predictive purposes. At best, the statistical results obtained from the data realized m erely provides support for the relative importance of the land-use change categories treated. In essence, the importance of the various land-use change categories, as related to witnessed increases or decreases in taxable wealth per ADA among the growth districts studied, may be discussed only in generic term s, at best relegated to relative importance on the strength of statistical significance only. PA R T XV A STUDY OF SELECTED SOCIOLOGICAL FACTORS RELATED TO THE FINANCIAL SUPPORT OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN CALIFORNIA C H A P T E R XI CHARACTERISTICS OF GROWTH 1945-62 Introduction The problem of population is the problem of our age (22:63). The above words of author Julian Huxley have been re - phrased in many different ways in California since its emergence as the most populous of the fifty United States, officially commemorated on December 28, 1962. During the years 1945-60, the rate of population increase in California was double that of the United States* growth rate, and numerically the population advanced from nine million to nearly seventeen million people, an average of one-half million new re s i dents per year. In the same period the enrollment of pupils in kinder garten through the twelfth grade swelled from one and one-half million to three and one-half million students. All cautious esti mates point to a continued acceleration of these figures. 172 173 The most recent projection of future California popula tion was released by A. Kenneth Beggs of the Stanford Research Institute, March 6, 1963: We estimate that C alifornia^ population will increase over the coming decade at an average rate of about 3. 3 per cent per year, which will result in a population in the State of about 25 million in 1973. This will represent an in crease in population of about 43 per cent over the coming decade. (75) Concerning the future of public school enrollment, Begg*s projection was: We estimate that the K-14 average daily attendance in California public schools will increase from about 3.8 m illion in 1962 to about six million in 1972-73. The share of total population that will be accounted for by average daily attendance in 1972-73 will be about 25.6 per cent as compared with about 22.9 per cent in 1962. (75) The sheer num erical impact of population expansion brings immediate attention to the continued needs for adequate school housing and the recruitm ent of classroom teachers. These quantita tive aspects of growth have been, and will continue to be subjected to intensive study and research. Of more recent concern to professional leaders has been the subsidiary aspects of growth and their implications for the future of public education. These subsidiary aspects include the changes which are taking place in the characteristics of society in respect to urbanization, ethnic groups, social mobility, living habits, and forms 174 o f liv e lih o o d . This concern was expressed succinctly in the Rockefeller report: Perhaps the greatest problem facing American education is the widely held view that all we require are a few more teachers, a few m ore buildings, a little more money. Such an approach will be disastrous. We are moving into the most demanding era in history. An edu cational system grudgingly and tardily patched to meet the needs of the moment will be perpetually out of date. (42:33) The administrative nature of this concern has also been expressed by the American Association of School Administrators: Changes in the number of persons in society, their age distribution, and the emerging patterns of population distribution have special meaning for the schools and their program s. The important role of educational admin istration in discovering these meanings and appropriately relating them to the schools can scarcely be overempha sized. (33:51) It is then the purpose of this chapter to review the research and literature relevant to three characteristics of popula tion growth in California since World War II: (1) migration, (2) employment, and (3) urban growth. Migration In the past decade, migrants have tended to leave the Deep South, the G reat Plains, the Appaiachains, and northern New England. They have moved to the m id- Atlantic seaboard, the Pacific Coast, the Southwest, 175 Florida, Alaska, and to a small extent, the Great Lakes area. (41:2) Importance of migration The Bureau of the Census has recorded that during the decade 1950-60, throughout the United States, there were 40.9 million reported births, 15.6 million deaths, and a cumulative migration involving over 100 million people. These m igrants include people who entered the United States from other countries, people crossing state boundaries, and people moving from one country to another. The popular view of migration is that of a constant flow of people from one place to another place. Since in reality there is continual flow of population movement in and out of communities, migratory statistics are computed in reference to in-m igration and out-migration. When the in-migration added to the natural increase is greater than the out-migration added to the number of deaths, population gains are recorded. Estim ates of the components of population change in the United States between 1950 and I960 published by the Bureau of the Census indicates that population growth in most of the United States stems from an increased birth rate, while in-m igration and out migration tend to balance each other out. 176 California was one of four states in which the in- migration exceeded the birth rate for the entire decade* In I960 alone, the excess of births over deaths was 227,000, while the excess of in-migration over out-migration was 335,000. The Millbank study of migration since World War II estim ates that California alone has accounted for over 50 per cent of the total interstate migration gains of native whites, and that a minimum of two-thirds of the population of California was born out side of the state* The Millbank study also suggests some definite trends which have been noted in postwar migration: 1. Migration tends to become more and more concentrated in a few states* 2. To a large extent, migration appears to be non-economically determined. Migrants are just as likely to move from states with a high per capita income as the opposite. 3. Central cities are places of net out-migration, and suburban rings a re focal points of net in-m igration. 4. There is a large out-migration of white people from central cities and substantial in-migration of Negroes, 5. The non-white population tends to be highly segregated within the city. 6. The first generation of foreign born are dying out rapidly and their children are distributing themselves throughout the general population. (39:60) 177 History of migration in California Most contemporary Californians came to this state from somewhere else* This fact is of far-reaching signifi cance, for a population of migrants differs from one that is native. The forces which induce people to move bear unevenly upon different segments of the population. (20:130) A colorful feature of the settlement of California has been the intensive recruitm ent and promotion of immigration, which has been engaged in by both public and private interests. A chronicle of this and other aspects of the migration record in California between 1850 and 1945 was the subject of a research study published in 1946 by the Commonwealth Club of California. (37). One of the important findings of this study was the long term trend toward urbanization in the state. In I860, there were only four towns in California with 2,500 or more citizens. Together they contained less than one-fifth of the total population. Eighty years later, in 1940, there were 167 urban places containing nearly three-fourts of the total population. A second finding of the Commonwealth Club study con cerned the major shift in population movement toward southern California at the expense of the rest of the state. This population shift was in evidence in the first decade of the twentieth century, 178 when a population gain of 217, 000 people was recorded for Los Angeles as compared to a population gain of 74, 000 during the same decade for San Francisco. Between 1900 and 1940, southern California increased its share of the total population from one-fifth to well over one-half, A third finding of the study concerned the movement of population from the cities into rural, non-farming areas. This trend was first observed in the 1930 to 1940 decade and was interrupted during the war years, when population congregated into defense production centers. The Commonwealth Club report concluded: The pull of California is firmly established and a century of migration has clearly marked the path. The experience of the last twenty years has shown that people keep coming to California in prosperity and depression, in peace and war, and whether wanted or unwanted. (37:47). Negro migration to California The Commonwealth Club study found that significant Negro migration to California was not in evidence until after 1900. By 1940, the Negro population was 124, 000, half of whom were in the city of Los Angeles. The urbanization of the Negro was almost complete by that date, with little more than 3 per cent of the Negro population reported as living on farm s. 179 Gunnar Myrdal wrote in 1944: The relatively great extent of Negro migration to California in the last decade is perhaps indicative of the future. Since Negroes get practically their only economic opportunities in growing cities, we may expect that most of the westward migration will be to the cities of the West Coast and not to inland cities and rural districts. (25:610) Between 1940-44, the Negro population in California doubled, and all of the m ajor war production areas experienced sub stantial gains in Negro residents. The Millbank study of postwar problems of migration found that: The West Coast gained over 250,000 Negroes from the rural and urban South, mid-West, and East. Ten per cent of the migrants entering California, Oregon, Washington, and Arizona between 1943-45 were Negroes. (38:154) The Millbank study concluded: Now that the war is done, there is every indication that most of the Negro in-m igrants will remain in or near these congested centers, and that much of the in ter state migration from the South will not be reversed. (38:155) A comparison of the 1950 and I960 United States census reveals that the acceleration of Negro migration into the metropolitan areas took place almost as predicted. The stark record of the effects of Negro migration on one community was documented in 1962 by David Franklin in an analysis of the block-by-block transform ation which took place in the city of 180 Compton, California, during the 1950-60 decade (49). In 1950, the non-white population of Compton constituted 4.8 per cent of the totcil census population of 47,991 residents. The proportion of non-whites to whites increased to 10.4 per cent in 1952, to 17. 1 per cent in 1955, and stood at 40. 1 per cent in I960. During this decade the entire population of Compton registered a healthy gain of 49.6 per cent, yet in the five-year period 1955-60, the white population declined by 18. 5 per cent, and the non-white population increased by 165 per cent. In a discussion of the question, "Are Cities Un- A m erican?" William H. Whyte emphasized: There is no denying that the proportion of Negroes in a neighborhood is a critical factor. Once the percent age of Negroes gets over a certain point--it seems to range between 10 and 20 per cent--whites will move out. In housing developments it has been found that "open occupancy" eventually means almost 100 per cent Negro occupancy, and Negro leaders themselves are leaning to the idea of quotas. (8:50) Employment Patterns, 1945-62 An extensive statistical record or employment activities in California was found in the California Statistical A bstract (48). The abstract lists nine major industrial divisions providing employ ment in California. The following table was derived from the data which was included in the abstract and graphically reveals the 181 comparatively small shifts in the proportion of workers employed in each division between 1945-60. CALIFORNIA LABOR FORCE P e r Cent of P e r Cent of Division Labor Force Labor Force 1945 I960 Agriculture 11 7 M ineral Extraction 1 1 Construction 4 6 Manuf actu ring 23 23 T ransportation 8 6 Trade 21 21 Finance 3 5 Services 15 17 Government 14 14 Between 1945-60 there was a shift of 6 per cent of the labor force among the divisions, with agricultural employment dis playing the m ost m arked decline, and the gains going to finance, services, and construction. Also, according to the table, 75 per cent of the total labor force in California in I960 was involved with four divisions; 182 manufacturing, trade, services, and government, all essentially urban activities. Fluctuations within the employment divisions, 1945-60 An examination of the employment statistics within each of the industrial divisions on a year-by-year basis reveals consider able variation and fluctuation. Each of the nonagricultural divisions registered employment gains for the entire period; several in dustries, however, achieved peak years of employment in 1955, 1956, and 1957, and by the publication of the California Statistical A bstract in 1961, had not fully recovered from the economic recession of 1958, The m ost stable employment gains were found to be in trade, finance, services, and government. These divisions con sistently employed more people each year throughout the entire study period. The most volatile divisions were construction and tra n s portation, For the entire study period, employment in construction increased from 204,400 to 295,000, The peak year, however, was in 1957, when 302, 300 workers were engaged in some phase of construction. Similarly, employment in transportation increased from 183 306, 000 in 1945 to 357, 000 in I960. The peak year once more was < 1957, when 372,800 transportation workers were reported. Manufacturing as a division displayed steady and sub stantial gains throughout the study period. The number of workers engaged in manufacturing increased from 701, 500 in 1945 to 1,315, 000 in I960. Within the division, however, there was widespread fluctuation. A ircraft and parts manufacturing which employed 282,000 workers in 1957, employed only 210,000 in I960. Motor vehicles and equipment, lumber and wood products, fish canning, and preserving attained peak years of employment in 1955, and employed fewer people each year since that date. Those manufacturing industries which reported an increasing number of workers employed each year during the study period are apparel goods, paper products, printing and publishing, electrical machinery, other machinery, and prim ary m etal manu facturing. National employment trends The trends in California employment between 1945-60 parallel the national trends very closely, particularly in regard to the decline in some forms of employment and the shifts in the proportion of the labor force among employment divisions. 184 The Commission on Inservice Education for School Administration regards the demand for and consequent growth in fields of personal service as being of profound importance. In 1949, for the first time in history, the number of workers in service industries (transportation and public utilities, trade, finance, insurance and real estate, govern ment services, and all other services) surpassed the number of goods-producing industries (agriculture, manu facturing, construction, and mining). Since then, the differential has steadily widened until by 1961, there were 34.4 million persons employed in the service industries and 25. 2 million in the goods-producing ones. All indica tions are that the differential will continue to widen in the future. (33:47) Unemployment due to technological change has been under investigation by a Congressional subcommittee on unemployment and the impact of automation which reports: Because of technological change, about 200, 000 production jobs have been eliminated in recent years in the aircraft industry alone. (40:7) Other stark examples of industries which are making planned reductions in their manpower requirements are the soft coal industry, the steel industry, chemicals, meat-packing, baked goods, railroads, and automobiles. On the same subject, William Glazier states: Technological change, decline in some industries and growth in others, shifts in the geographical locations of plants, and changes in consumer demand have caused many millions of workers to be unemployed and have kept them that way. They are the victims of growth and progress in the American economy. (64:44) 185 The implications of the emerging employment pattern for education was the object of an intensive study by John K. Norton: The work force must be both broadly educated as citizens and highly trained as workers if they are to comprehend and adjust to current and future technological change. People must learn to face the necessity for geographical and occupational transfers; low levels of education and training limit mobility and increase in security. (40:16) Urban Growth By 1980, California will have sin estimated 30 million persons; about 28 million of these people will live in one metropolitan area or another. Thus while California has been experiencing phenomenal growth, most of its growth is yet to come. (51:10) C haracteristics in urban growth Urban growth in the United States has been characterized by the steady accumulation of population into large cities and the land areas surrounding these cities. The all-encompassing area of a large city and its adjacent communities has been variously defined as metropolitan area, metropolitan region, megalopolis, m etrop olis, super-m etropolis, and urban sprawl. The Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas as desig nated by the United States Office of the Census have been utilized as working boundaries by regional planners and social scientists, but only because no m ore functional definition has been devised. 186 Hallenbeck collected six scholarly definitions of m etro politan areas. Essentially they all expressed the concept that a metropolitan area is that area which has a social and economic interrelationship with a large city (11). More precise definitions are apt to be rhetorical for two reasons. Firstly, the outer limits of metropolitan areas are con stantly shifting as a corollary of increased population mobility and technological improvements in communication, transportation, and engineering. Secondly, metropolitan areas are superimposed over established city, county, special district, and even state boundaries without benefit of legal precedent. An entire body of te^iutiques has been developed by social scientists to determine empirically whether any given area is functionally inside or outside of the influence of a central city. Description of a metropolitan area Metropolitan areas have been described more success fully than they have been defined. The nucleus of a metropolitan area is generally considered to be a central city. Dickenson writes: Such a city will have a population considerably larger than that of surrounding towns; it will be an in dependent center of trade, with a large variety of regional industries, and a large wholesale business; it 187 will be a financial center and finally a cultural and administrative center. (62) The rapid development of motor transport, accompanied by grandiose highway construction, has extended the radius of the central city and brought unprecedented vitality to form erly independ ent communities and rural areas. William Whyte, J r . , states: Of all the forces re-shaping the American m etrop olis, the most powerful and insistent are those rooted in changing modes of transportation . . . . With the swift development of mechanized urban transportation the American city was finally equipped to grow to any size that men could learn to manage or bear to live in. (8:53) In 1933, R. D. McKenzie believed that the advent of motor transportation had made possible a new "super-community": This new type of super-community organized around a dominant focal point and comprising a multitude of differential centers of activity differs from the m etro- politanism established by rail transportation in the complexity of its institutional division of labor and the mobility of its population. (23:7) Coinciding with the age of motor transportation has been the shift of population movement within urban areas to areas ad jacent to but outside of the central city. Commencing with the enumeration of the 1910 United States Census, the areas outside the central cities have been observed to experience a greater proportion of growth than the areas within city boundaries. The increasing significance of the suburbs in American 188 life was noted by Douglass in 1925. He concluded that suburbs were a natural outcome of urban growth and the crowding of cities (7). Thirty years later, Frederick J. Gardiner described the suburban trend with cautious astonishment: The present suburbanization or metropolitanization of all of our large cities on the North American continent started in 1945, just after the second world war. It is one of the amazing developments of our time and is having a signal effect upon the way of life of a large segment of our people. (30:148) William Whyte, J r . , cited the Los Angeles metropolitan area as an extreme example of suburbanization: Los Angeles which has sometimes been called one hundred suburbs in search of a city, shows the pattern at its most extreme; there is hardly any center at all, and what center there is seems useful to most citizens as a way to get from one freeway to another. (8:9) Van Arsdol, following an intensive analysis of the Los Angeles and other metropolitan areas, has concluded that suburban ization is basically the result of a growing gap between the bound aries of the physical city and the boundaries of the corporate city (63). He points out that there was relatively little residential con struction during the 1940-50 decade, yet the population of the cities increased at an accelerated rate. When new residential construc tion was recommenced in the postwar period, it was concentrated in sub-areas of the metropolis which had not previously been built up. The population quickly shifted from the overcrowded mature areas 189 of the city to these relatively undeveloped areas. He concludes: Given the rigidity of corporate city boundaries, the extension of the physical city produced the flight to the suburbs. (38:429) Van Arsdol further hypothesizes that there are definite lim its to this outward expansion. Commenting on his findings that rapid metropolitan growth and a densely populated city are conducive to rapid suburbanization, while a large population inhibits further suburbanization, he suggests: This might be taken to mean that growth tends to take the form of outward expansion until the spread of the city begins to present a b a rrie r to internal transport and communication, at which juncture growth takes the form of upward expansion near the metropolitan center. (63:428) The Fortune-ACTION Study of City Dwellers tends to support Van Arsdol's hypothesis (8). The study consisted of personal interviews with residents of high-rise apartment buildings and single-dwelling renovated homes in Philadelphia, Chicago, and New York. Among the city dwellers who were interviewed, 41 per cent had lived in the suburbs some time in the past, and 10 per cent had moved directly from the suburbs. A small but not insignificant minority of the families who had returned from the suburbs were m arried couples with young children. 190 S u m m ary of the ch ap ter The m aterial which was presented in this chapter was developed from a comprehensive review of the historical and con temporary literature pertinent to population growth in the United States and, specifically, California. Four long-range characteristics of population growth were treated: 1. The m igratory character of population growth. 2. The rapid build-up of urban areas around the major cities following the development of motor transportation. 3. The decentralization of industry and commerce. 4. The social and economic interdependence of central cities and their suburban neighbors. In the ensuing chapter these aspects of urban growth will be treated in respect to their social consequences and im pli cations. C H A P T E R XII IM PLIC A TIO N S O F U R B A N GROW TH, 1 9 4 5 -6 2 Introduction Few areas have been studied so often--and yet so un- fruitfully--as the areas of urban concentration. This apparent paradox may well be unraveled into two strands: (1) Studies largely ignore the "why" while defining the "what" at great length; and (2) the "how" for improving the existing conditions ignore the history, direction, and pull of the community for which it is advanced. (30:43) Studies of the implications of urban growth have not been the exclusive domain of any one discipline. Generally, the three approaches to the study of metropolitan area problems have been sociological, economical, and governmental. Social Aspects of Urban Growth Sociologists have been concerned to varying degrees with the implications of urban decentralization upon the social composition of the population, its agreement in space, its requirements for goods and services, and its organization into prim ary and secondary groups. 191 192 In the main, sociological research has emphasized one of two methods: (1) social-area analysis, and (2) case study. Social-area analysis Shevky and his associates are usually credited with developing the techniques of social-area or neighborhood analysis, although the technique has been refined and adapted by others (29). Utilizing census tract data, the investigator seeks to determine the social characteristics of different residential neighborhoods in a city or county in respect to social rank, degree of urbanization, and degree of segregation, FoJr determining social rank the investigator concentrates on an analysis of the data relevant to level of occupation, level of income, and educational attainment of adults in the tract* Differences in the degree of urbanization are hypothe sized by the investigator from an analysis of the birth rate, the proportion of women in the labor force, and the percentage of occupancy of single-dwelling units within a given census tract. The degree of segregation within a given area is hypothe sized from the proportion of ethnic and foreign born groups in respect to the entire population of the tract, Social-area analysis was utilized by Schmid in an 193 analysis of ten American cities in 1950 with results which led him to conclude that the method possessed a high degree of generality in its application (72), Case studies of urban communities Lynd,s longitudinal study of Middletown, which extended from 1885 to 1935, was one of the first of many excellent document aries of social transformation in individual communities. (20). One of the most unusual of these documentaries is William H. Whyte*s saga of P ark Forest, Illinois, which he refers to as a "package community." (73) Conceived and developed by private industry as a community designed to attract lower-medium income fam ilies, the community was characterized by a high degree of homogeneity of the residential population in respect to educational background, values, and aspirations, and also by a high degree of residential transiency. P atricia Sexton*s study of the Detroit Public Schools focuses attention upon the plight of the culturally-deprived youth attending a large city school system (28). She found a high degree of correlation between family income and success in school, and also a disparity between the educational facilities which were available to upper-income children as compared to children of low income groups. 194 ConantIs philosophical observations resulting from a study of many American school systems also emphasizes the dis crepancies between public education in the slum areas at one extreme and the suburban areas at the other extreme (6). Conant concludes that both the metropolitan areas and the suburban areas lacked the social and economic cohesion which is characteristic of the small independent city. Commenting on the case study approach to community problems, Robert Knapp emphasizes: Each case of course focuses attention to those phenomena which are of special interest to the investigators. Consequently, each case points up one or more aspects of social structure or process around which the various prob lems of the community are seen to be centered. (18:49) Knapp adds that no community is ever completely rep re sentative of a total social order and that, in fact, each community is unique, since its environmental setting and social structure give it a distinct character of its own. Economic and governmental concerns with urban growth A brief treatm ent of the governmental-oriented and economic-oriented concerns with urban growth are included at this point because of their interrelationship with the sociological-oriented approach. 195 A survey of the economic-oriented literature reveals concern with the relationship of industrial and other economic activity to the labor supply, m arkets, transportation facilities, and raw m aterial sources of the metropolitan community. Economists also are analyzing the tax structure of the metropolitan community and its sm aller sub-communities. To this end, George S. Blair states: Typically this type of study reveals that only the larger community is a reasonable taxing unit and that the tax bases overlap, are inadequate, and unfair in term s of taxable property, because of the physical loca tion of particular industries and economic enterprises. (30:42) Political scientists are expressing concern with the complex of governments which have emerged more or less hap hazardly within metropolitan communities, and the technology of urban services which transcend existing political units. Concluding their study of the Flint, Michigan, M etro politan Area, Zimmer and Hawley state: The inadequacy of urban services in the fringe is due in part to the seemingly inevitable lag of capital im provements behind rapid population growth. Of even greater importance, however, is the fact that jurisdiction over the fringe area is shared by a miscellany of govern mental units--cities, villages, counties, townships, and school districts--m ost of which are ill-adapted to the provision of urban services. (74:258) 196 Proposed Solutions to Metropolitan Problems Throughout the contemporary literature related to the problems of urban growth, frequent references are found pertaining to reorganization of the local government structure in specific metropolitan areas. Those which are cited consistently include: (1) Baton Rouge and Cast Baton Rouge P arishes, Louisiana, (2) Miami and Dade counties, Florida, (3) Atlanta and Fullom counties, Georgia, and (4) the Toronto Metropolitan Federation. Among these, the latter is the recipient of the most intensive analysis for the reason that it is the first metropolitan region on the North American continent to totally reorganize its governmental structure to deal with the impact of urban growth. Review of the Toronto plan The Toronto plan, or "Metro" as it is known locally, has been in operation since 1954 and is particularly significant to this study, since it includes not only a Metropolitan Council which coordinates all municipal activities, but also a Metropolitan School Board which was created to supervise and coordinate all fiscal activities of school districts within the metropolitan region. Concerning the Toronto plan, Robert Lonsdale writes: School adm inistrators and school board m em bers would find the organization of education under the 197 Metropolitan School Board in Toronto of particular interest. (19:28) Seymour Freedgood of Fortune magazine states: The Metropolitan Toronto plan is a significant approach. Under it, a federated government was estab lished for Toronto and twelve surrounding municipalities to provide area-wide services for all of them, leaving the local governments their control over local services. (8:106) Describing the conditions which stimulated the develop ment of "M etro," Frederick G. Gardiner observes: The metropolitan area had become balkaniaed into thirteen local municipalities--one city, three villages, four towns, and five urbanized townships. Their boundaries were purely artificial. You could not tell where one started and the other ended. Each was geared to a local pattern of development. (30:149) John G. Grumm’s detailed report of the Toronto plan was the source of the following description of its operation (66). Essentially, the Toronto plan created a new govern mental body known as the Metropolitan Council. The council con sists of twenty-four members who are the mayors of Toronto and each of the suburban municipalities plus one alderman from each of Toronto*s wards. The separate Metropolitan School Board was created by a Parliam entary amendment to the original proposal which would have brought school functions directly under the council. The School 198 Board consists of the chairman from each of the suburban school boards, trustees from each of the city wards, and two representa tives from the parochial schools operating within the area. All school property held by the local school districts prior to 1954 was taken over by the metropolitan government as well as public buildings, parks and playgrounds, water and sewage system s, and roads and transit system s. The act of incorporation specified that henceforth "Metro" would meet the payments of principal and interest when they were due on all outstanding debts in connection with this property. Funds to meet the payments on this assumed debt are received from the local municipalities on a basis that is proportion ate to their assessm ent. At the time that "Metro" came into existence, reassessm ent of the entire metropolitan area was ac complished on a uniform basis by the placement of all local a sse ss ment officials under the authority of the Metropolitan A ssessm ent Commissioner, Under the articles of incorporation, deficit financing is classified under two types: (1) those projects which are area-wide in nature and are of benefit to citizens of more than one of the municipalities involved, and (2) projects that are strictly local in character and benefit. In the first instance, the interest and 199 principal are repaid by "Metro" from funds contributed by all of the m em bers. In the latter, "Metro" pays the debt charges by levying the municipality involved. In the case of schools, the levy is split between the two sources, with the district involved paying according to ability, and the Metropolitan District assuming the balance of the obligation. The operating budget of local school districts are met by maintenance assistance payments to the districts on a per pupil formula. These payments are intended as minimum standards, and local districts may voluntarily tax themselves for the further im provement of their own educational program . Grumm found that in the beginning the capital grants for schools were woefully inadequate: In 1954, "Metro" contributed 38 per cent of the capital costs of the metropolitan area schools, while the local municipalities paid 35 per cent and the province supplied 27 per cent of the total. But by 1957, "Metro*s" share had diminished to 21 per cent, the proportion paid by the province had been reduced to 17 per cent, and the local municipalities were paying almost two-thirds. Hence, by 1957, the financial burden for schools on the hard-pressed communities was greater, not less, than in the beginning of "Metro, " and it was still unevenly spread. (74:29) In 1958, the Metropolitan Council was given authority to make such capital grants as it saw fit, but based upon the recom mendation of the Metropolitan School Board. Grumm concludes: 200 It is now expected that "Metro" will assume a larger share of the capital financing of new schools, that is to say, that the costs will be spread more evenly throughout the area. But this goal may not be achieved if there is an acceleration in the demands for new schools. (74:29) Review of California proposals for metropolitan areas In March of 1959, the governor of the state of California appointed a special commission on metropolitan area problems, and charged it with the responsibility to study and make recommenda tions on the critical problems of California*s metropolitan areas (51). Included on the twenty-man commission was one professional school adm inistrator, S. C. Joyner, Business Manager of the Los Angeles City School D istrict. Twenty months later, on December 17, I960, the commission submitted to the governor a report of their findings and . ** recommendations (51:4). The commission reported as finding that the tremendous migration of people into C alifornia^ metropolitan areas had generated increased demand for more and broader governmental services; created excessive discrepancies in the level of urban services; developed tax structures that have little or no relation to services received; and greatly increased the number of independent and often overlapping government units. 201 Throughout the report the commission presented specific examples to support their findings: Though much of the tangible and intangible wealth of the State is concentrated in metropolitan communities, such wealth is not evenly distributed throughout the con stituent local units of government. (51:9) There is a dram atic and often unsuspected variation between cost of services and level of services received in the same metropolitan area. (51:11) The average metropolitan area resident would need to keep in touch with the officers and activities of as many as eight or ten special districts; the facts indicate that he does not. (51:11) City incorporation to promote special economic interests have become a particularly serious problem in California. Taking advantage of their city status, re la tively small groups of people have profited at the expense of the metropolitan whole. (51:12) While the county maintains jurisdiction over un incorporated areas, and the city over incorporated areas, there is usually no coordination between the two ju ris dictions concerning metropolitan m atters. (51:12) Legislative interest in metropolitan area problems The Interim Committee on Conservation, Planning, and Public Works of the California State Assembly has been actively interested in metropolitan area problems since 1955. In that year a subcommittee on planning was delegated to engage in an intensive investigation of metropolitan area problems and to survey the approach to other metropolitan areas outside of California toward a 202 solution of sim ilar problems. The first report of the interim subcommittee was sub mitted to the full committee and the Legislative Assembly in January, 1957 (43), The report was received and the subcommittee was in structed to proceed with their investigations during the 1957-59 interim period and to present recommendations at the following session. The second report of the interim subcommittee was sub mitted at the opening of the 1959 Legislative Assembly (44), It contained a summary of the findings of the subcommittee and a specific proposal of legislation authorizing the formation of m etro politan multi-purpose districts in California, The third report of the interim committee was sub mitted in November 28, 1962, and reviewed in detail three years of controversial debate and widening opposition to the adoption of multi-purpose district legislation in California (45), The conclusion of the final report of the subcommittee was: The most feasible method for coping with the area- wide needs would seem to be one which could demonstrate widespread support and political viability. This commit te e ^ studies indicate that under the present circumstances in California the most effective approach would seem to be through intergovernmental cooperation on the local level, rather than through the creation of new agencies. (45:60) 203 The urbanized school district in California In April, 1963, the Superintendent of Schools of the Los Angeles City School Districts issued a report dealing with the urban ization problems with which the district was confronted (79). By urbanization, the report refers specifically to the social and economic characteristics which have been identified with areas of high population density: residential transiency, rapidly changing composition of the population by age, race, and income group, and the corresponding changes in the physical character of J the district resulting from urban renewal, high-rise apartments, public-housing projects, and freeway construction. The superintendent maintains: Every large metropolitan district in the nation becomes a poorer district as its financial resources and teaching talent are diverted from normal programs in order to deal with abnormal situations growing out of the problems of rapid urbanization,(79:2) The superintendent contends that the increase in staff and budget allocations for many educational services in recent years cannot be explained in term s of quantitative increase in student popu lation, The critical nature of the problem springs from the drastic changes in the composition of the residential population within certain sections of the district. The superintendent writes: 204 As a major port of entry to the most populous state in the union, Los Angeles receives large numbers of in migrant families. Many of these families come from areas offering limited educational opportunities. The transiency rate is high. Their educational needs cannot be met through normal procedures in classes of normal size. (79:2) Behind the published report is a month*s-long investi gation conducted by school district personnel, delving into every budget item of the districtIs educational program and resources. Utilizing an unsophisticated adaptation of social-area analysis, the district was divided into study areas and the socio economic composition of the population of each area was compiled. The cost of educational services per pupil in each of the study areas was then computed. The findings were that the areas of high population density were costing more for education per pupil than areas of medium or low population density. Other costs of urbanization which were cited by the superintendent include: 1. Salary costs of classified personnel which range 11 per cent higher in urban areas than in non-urban areas. 2. The removal from the tax roll of property converted for freeways, urban redevelopment, and public housing. 205 3. The control of air pollution, requiring special disposal of rubbish and water products. 4. Vandalism and burglary, intensified by the complex social structure and population density arising from urbanization. The superintendent concluded: Existing equalization formulas do not help with this problem. They are designed to assist the so-called financially "poorer" districts of the state. They recognize population sparsity but not population density. They p ro vide no help to the school district saddled with the educa tional problems of culturally divergent youth. (79:3) The Los Angeles School D istrict is not alone in its recognition of the impact of urbanization as a consequence of growth. In the course of this investigation, the chief adm inistrators of 178 California school districts responded to a survey of changing growth patterns which they had observed in their respective districts. Specifically, the adm inistrators were asked to predict factors which could foreseeably change the pattern of growth in their districts during the coming five years, 1962-67. The adm inistrators of 107, or 60 per cent, of the r e sponding districts predicted that the acceleration of multiple dwelling construction could foreseeably change their growth pattern within the stated period. 206 The Inglewood Unified School D istrict submitted a copy of the report of an enrollment survey which had been completed by the district on February 25, 1963, (78), The survey had found that of 29, 138 hoursing units in the district, 13,669, or 47 per cent, were multiple dwellings. The report concluded: Already 30 per cent of the children in our schools are living in multiple dwellings. This percentage varies in different areas of Inglewood, from 3, 7 per cent in the Frank Parent School Zone, to 67, 5 per cent in the Highland School Zone. We can only conclude that growth in enroll ment due to apartment house living has already begun! (78:2) Other urbanization factors which were predicted by the responding adm inistrators in order of frequency were: (1) changes in zoning, (2) changes in the local economy, (3) clearing and r e building of older areas, (4) increased water supply, (5) high-rise apartment buildings, (6) federal urban renewal projects, (7) anti segregation legislation, and (8) further extension of freeway pat terns. Summary of the chapter This chapter has been a review of the literature in respect to the implications of urban growth. Specifically, the chapter treated: (1) the problems of urban growth as recognized by the sociologist, the economist, and the political scientist respec tively; (2) the government approach to the solution of metropolitan 207 area problems with specific reference to the Toronto Metropolitan Federation; (3) the recognition given to metropolitan area problems by the governor and the Legislative Assembly of the state of California; and (4) the recognition of the implications of problems of urbanization for California school districts, with specific reference to the Los Angeles School District* C H A P T E R XIH PROCEDURE AND TREATMENT OF THE DATA: PART IV Introduction The purpose of P art IV of the study was to investigate the phenomenon of growth in California during the fifteen-year period following the end of World War II and to determine sociological changes coincident with that growth. The specific question to be investigated was this: Does the appearance or absence of certain sociological factors coincide with upward or downward trends in assessed valua tion per pupil in average daily attendance ? Gathering of Data and Procedure Gathering of data In the preliminary stages of the investigation, the opinions and suggestions of three experts in the field of population growth were solicited. Those approached were: 208 209 Dr. Edward C. McDonagh, Chairman, Department of Sociology, University of Southern California Dr, Maurice D, Van Arsdol, J r . , Director of the Bureau of Population Research, University of Southern California Dr. David M ars, Associate Professor of Public Administration, University of Southern California Each of the above scholars contributed generously of his time and knowledge, offering bibliographic m aterials and suggesting guidelines for the investigation. Subsequently, additional assistance was received from Mr. George E. McMullen, Consultant, Special Projects, Los Angeles City Schools, who contributed the source m aterials from which the section on urbanization problems of the Los Angeles City School D istrict was drawn; and Mr. John A. Rehfuss, Assistant City Manager of Palm Springs, who supplied technical advice in the preparation of the section on proposed solutions to problems of urban growth. Procedure The related research and literature were examined to provide a basis for the investigation and to establish the selection of the specific sociological factors which would be investigated in the 412 growth school districts. 210 From the literature the following factors were found to be mentioned with high frequency in respect to social analysis of populated areas: 1. Housing: including number, type density, age condition, rentals, and vacancy rate, 2, Workers: including the number of working people, their kinds of employment, working skills, and * earnings, 3, Population composition: including age, sex, ethnic, and lingustic differences in the population, 4. Population characteristics: including family units, women in the labor force, educational status, and rate of residential transiency. Inasmuch as these were all factors which could be adapted to quantitative m easurement, it was determined to select the questionnaire items from among these factors. Construction of Section II of the Questionnaire The final design of Section II of the questionnaire was the outgrowth of an extended trial and e rro r process. In the prelim inary phase of its construction, interviews were conducted with twelve school adm inistrators from among the 412 growth school districts. School adm inistrators are not necessarily demographic experts. Therefore, the purpose of the interviews was to determine 211 the extent of their ability to provide factual information relative to the quantitative measurement of these factors within the physical boundaries of their respective school districts. The names of the interviewees are listed below, with the positions which they held at the time of the interview: Dr. Edward Beaubier, Superintendent, Fountain Valley School District Mr. Edward Clarke, Superintendent, Rowland Elementary School District Dr. Gerald Dart, Superintendent, Lennox Elementary School D istrict Dr. Maylon Drake, Superintendent, Duarte Unified School D istrict Mr. Charles Gawthrop, Director of Personnel, Inglewood Unified School D istrict Mr. Bolton Jones, Assistant Superintendent, Downey Unified School D istrict M r. F o rrest Lindsay, Business Manager, Hayward Union High School D istrict Mr. Ralph Lovik, Superintendent, Lancaster Elementary School District M r. Warren MacQueen, Superintendent, El Segundo Unified School D istrict Mr. Kenneth Neils on, Superintendent, Magnolia Elementary School D istrict Dr. Donald Reber, Superintendent, Claremont Unified School D istrict 212 Mr. Jack Singer, Superintendent, Culver City Unified School District Each of the interviewees expressed enthusiastic interest in the study and cooperated fully in responding to every task which was requested of him. Results of the interviews As a result of a series of interviews, the questionnaire was finalized according to the following guidelines: 1. The questionnaire should ask only for those data which respondents could reasonably be expected to have available to them. 2. The respondents should be requested to seek assistance from other sources where they did not personally have the data necessary to complete the questionnaire. 3. The questionnaire should be designed to determine extreme imbalances or deviations in the composition or character of the re si dential population of each district. 4. The respondents should be permitted to answer within a range rather than to be held accountable for precise responses. 213 5. Wherever possible, the questionnaire should provide for determining both the upper and lower extreme range for any given factor* 6. Responses should lend themselves to tabulation for comparative purposes. 7. The questionnaire should be presented as simply and clearly as possible. Verification of the questionnaire As a final precaution, ten school districts within the Los Angeles metropolitan area whose boundaries lent themselves to census tract analysis were subjected to a test. Questionnaires were mailed to each of the ten districts and, as they were returned, the responses were checked against the actual census data. In all instances the responses were within the same column as was assigned by the investigators from the census m aterial. Critique of the questionnaire The finalized investigating instrument possessed several good features and one severe limitation. In respect to its good features: firstly, the instrument was capable of distinguishing from among the factors those social 214 characteristics which are comparatively isolated and infrequent from those characteristics which are generalized among growing school districts. Secondly, the instrument was capable of pointing out extreme deviations in the character and composition of the re s i dential populations of growing school districts. Thirdly, since each respondent was provided with a substantial range within which to assign his response, the likelihood of wide deviations as the result of guessing was considerably reduced. Fourthly, the majority of items on the instrument had corresponding items against which responses could be compared and evaluated. Lastly, the items and responses were designed for objective tabulation and statistical interpretation. A severe limitation to the instrument resulted from the decision to provide a substantial range within which a respondent could assign his response. The effect of the decision was to render the instrument insensitive to all but fairly extreme percentage deviations among the responding districts. 215 U tiliz a tio n of the Q u e stio n n a ir e Selection of respondents The procedure by which the growth school districts of California were identified and selected for the purposes of this study was explained at length in Chapter I of P a rt U of this study. Briefly, in order to qualify as a growth district, it was necessary for a dis trict to meet both of the following criteria: 1. The d is tric ts total percentage of increase in ADA during the fifteen-year period (1945-61) was a minimum of 100 per cent. 2. The d is tric ts ADA for the fiscal year 1960-61 was a minimum of 900 for elementary districts, 1, 000 for high school districts, and 1, 500 for unified districts. All of the school districts of California were subjected to this criteria, and 412 qualifying districts were identified as growth districts. P rio r to this selection, statistical information had been collected relevant to annual changes in enrollment and assessed valuation per pupil for all of the school districts in California. It thus became a simple computer operation to segregate the 412 216 growth districts for detailed study and analysis. For the purpose of determining the coincidence of the selected list of sociological factors with growth in these districts, the 412 districts were subdivided into three classifications which are described in detail. Designation of the larg est- growth districts The 412 districts were first ranked in accordance with the num erical total of their average daily attendance. The growth district with the largest attendance was at the head of the list, and the district with the sm allest attendance was at the tail of the rank ing. This ranking was designated as Classification I. An extremely wide range was found among growth dis tricts in respect to total attendance, and this group was subsequently subdivided into those districts which were above the median of all growth districts in respect to total attendance, and those districts which were below the median of all growth districts in respect to total attendance. Those which were above the median in this respect are referred to henceforward as the largest-growth districts. Designation of.the fastest- growth districts The 412 districts were next ranked in accordance with 217 their percentage gains in student population between 1945-61. The growth district with the largest gain in attendance during the period was placed at the head of the ranking. The district with the sm allest percentage gain in attendance for the period was placed at the tail of the ranking. This ranking was designated as Classification X I. An extreme range was found to exist in this classification also, and the ranking was subsequently subdivided into those districts which were above the median of all growth districts in respect to percentage gains in attendance, and those districts which were below the median in percentage gains. Those which were above the median in this respect are referred to henceforward as the fastest-growth districts. A ssessed valuation per pupil Inasmuch as the integral function of the study was to analyze the relationship between growth and assessed valuation per pupil, the 412 districts were ranked in accordance with their p er centage change in assessed valuation per pupil during the study period. The growth district with the most favorable percentage change in the ratio of assessed valuation per pupil was placed at the head of the ranking. The growth district with the least favorable 218 percentage change in assessed valuation per pupil was at the bottom of the ranking. This ranking was designated as Classification III. In order to reduce the wide range that was in evidence, this classification was subdivided into those districts which were above the median of all growth districts in this respect, and those districts which were below the median of all growth districts in this respect. Those districts which were above the median of all growth districts in respect to maintaining or improving the ratio of assessed valuation per pupil are referred to henceforward as the districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil. Return of the questionnaire Following the return of the questionnaire and the verifi cation of the sample (described at length in P art II), each responding district was identified as being above or below the median of all growth districts in each of the three classifications just described. A theoretical possibility existed for any given school district to be above the median in all three classifications or below the median in all three classifications or any combination thereof. Among the original 412 districts, fifteen were found to be above the median in all three classifications, and eighteen districts were found 219 to be below the median in all three classifications. All conceivable combinations were represented among the rem ainder of the districts. In deference to these possibilitiesf the responses were checked in each item, and it was found consistently that the districts which responded to each item were in balanced proportions above and below the median of the original group. Summary of the chapter This chapter dealt with the procedures which were followed in the design of the questionnaire; the testing of the ques tionnaire; the method of selecting respondents, and finally the procedure which was developed to analyze the returns. In the next chapter the returns are analyzed item by item in minute detail. C H A P T E R XIV TREATMENT OF THE DATA Introduction In this chapter the data which were gathered from the responding districts is tabulated and analyzed. The responses to items 25 through 48 of the questionnaire are analyzed individually as they relate to California growth districts in general, and as they relate specifically to the three classifications of growth districts which were established for the purposes of this study. At the conclusion of the chapter, the findings under each item are consolidated and presented in the form of four tables. These tables are entitled: Table 44: Extreme Differences Among Growth Districts Table 45: Identifying Features of the Fastest«Growth Districts Table 46: Identifying Features of the Largest-Growth Districts Table 47: Identifying Features of the Districts Which Maintained a Favorable Ratio of A ssessed Valuation P er Pupil 220 221 D w ellin g U nit C o n stru ctio n , 1 9 4 5 -6 2 Items 25, 26, and 27 were developed to analyze the relationship between dwelling unit construction and student population growth in California between 1945-62, The districts which had been selected for study were asked to estimate the percentage of dwelling units which had been completed prior to 1945; the percentage of dwelling units which had been constructed during the first decade of the study period, 1945-55; and the percentage of dwelling units which were constructed during the last seven years of the study period, 1956-62. One hundred eighty-three districts responded to this particular inquiry. The distribution of the responses are found opposite items 2 5, 26, and 27 of Table 44. Analysis of the total responses A first analysis of the responses indicated that a very sm all proportion of the growth districts had experienced substantial residential construction prior to the study period. Almost one-third of the responding districts reported that less than 10 per cent of their total dwelling units had been constructed prior to 1945, and two-thirds of the districts reported that less than 30 per cent of their dwelling units had been constructed prior to 1945. 222 One district out of 183 responses reported that 81 to 100 per cent of its dwelling units had been completed prior to the 1945-62 growth study period. A general acceleration of dwelling unit starts and com pletions was reported for the first decade of the study period. Only twenty-three of the responding districts reported less than 10 per cent of their residential construction was constructed during this decade, and two districts reported 81 to 100 per cent of their residential construction was between 1945-55. All but eighteen of the growth districts reported the impact of residential construction during the last seven-year period. Fifteen districts reported that 81 to 100 per cent of their dwelling units were constructed during this period, and 107 districts reported that over 30 per cent of their dwelling units had been constructed during the seven years, 1956-62. A comparison of the responses in columns D and E for each of the three sub-periods tends to dram atize the volume of residential construction between 1956-62. P rio r to 1945, only four teen of the growth districts reported the completion of over 60 per cent of their dwelling units. During the decade 1945-55, another fourteen districts reported the completion of over 60 per cent of their total residential construction. In the final seven-year period, forty- four d istricts reported the sta rt and completion of 60 per cent .r m ore of all residential construction. Following the tabulation of the total response*, the I a \ d istricts which responded to item s 25, 26, and 27 were identified *• above-m edian or below -m edian in accordance with their position ir. the original ranking of the 412 growth district classification* w ere described in detail on page 216. T rends in dwelling unit construction, 1945-62 The problem was to determ ine whether there were *n\ differing c h arac teristic s in the resid en tial construction pattern among the three classifications of growth d istric ts. The above-m edian responses in columns C, D, and £ w ere grouped together, which gave the total responses of district* reporting 30 to 100 p e r cent of th eir dwelling units constructed within each of the three tim e periods. The numerical responses of thc*« above-m edian d istricts w ere converted into percentages with the following resu lts: ______________C L A 5 S I F I C A T I ON T im e P eriods I (P er Cent) U (P e r CentY IQ (P e r £ s a tf P rio r to 1945 38 12 67 1945 to 1955 61 55 S3 1956 to 1962 57 65 43 223 four districts reported the start and completion of 60 per cent or more of all residential construction. Following the tabulation of the total responses, the 183 districts which responded to items 25, 26, and 27 were identified as above-median or below-median in accordance with their position in the original ranking of the 412 growth district classifications which were described in detail on page 216. Trends in dwelling unit construction, 1945-62 The problem was to determine whether there were any differing characteristics in the residential construction pattern among the three classifications of growth districts. The above-median responses in columns C, D, and E were grouped together, which gave the total responses of districts reporting 30 to 100 per cent of their dwelling units constructed within each of the three time periods. The numerical responses of these above-median districts were converted into percentages with the following results: _____________CLASSIFICATION ___________________ Time Periods I (Per Cent) II (Per Cent) III (Per Cent) P rio r to 1945 38 12 67 1945 to 1955 61 55 53 1956 to 1962 57 65 43 224 The largest-grow th districts Reading from top to bottom, the percentages in each column refer to the proportion of districts of each classification which reported that 30 per cent or more of their dwelling units were constructed during the matching time period. For example, the largest growth districts, Classification I, were identified as 38 per cent of all of the growth districts reporting substantial dwelling unit construction prior to 1945. Between 1945-55, they were identified as 61 per cent of all growth districts which reported substantial residential construction, and between 1956-62, 57 per cent of the growth districts which reported substantial residential construction were identified as the largest-grow th districts. The fastest-growth districts Those districts which were above-median of all growth districts in respect to percentage gains in student population between 1945-62, Classification II, were identified as only 12 per cent of the districts reporting substantial dwelling unit construction prior to 1945, and jumped to a 65 per cent representation among the districts which reported substantial residential construction in the last seven- year period, 1956-62. 225 Favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil The districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil between 1945-62, Classification III, displayed a completely different pattern from the two other growth classifications. They were seemingly the most built-up residentially, prior to 1945, and, percentage-wise, their residential expansion throughout the growth period was more moderate than either the largest-grow th or the fastest-growth districts. Summary of the analysis of items 25, 26, and 27 Items 25, 26, and 27 of the questionnaire were designed to determine the relationship, if any, between dwelling unit construc tion and student population increase between 1945-62 in the 412 school districts which had been identified previously as growth school dis tricts. One hundred eighty-three districts responded to this inquiry. The responses were tabulated in term s of totals and also as to whether they fell above-median or below-median in respect to total average daily attendance, percentage of increase in average daily attendance, and percentage of change in the ratio of assessed valua tion per pupil. The findings are sum m arized below: It was found that a relatively small proportion of the growth districts had experienced substantial residential construction prior to 1945. At the extremes, fourteen school districts reported that 60 to 100 per cent of their dwelling units had been constructed prior to 1945. Inasmuch as these districts had qualified as growth districts within the definition established for this study, a parallel relationship between growth and residential con struction was not absolutely indicated. The fastest-growth school districts between 1945- 62 were identified as having experienced the least residential construction prior to 1945, and the largest proportion of residential construction between 1956-62, among the three classifications of growth districts. The largest-grow th districts were identified with a relatively sm all proportion of the residential construction which was reported prior to 1945 and a substantial proportion of the residential con struction which was reported between 1956-62. The districts which maintained a favorable ratio of 227 assessed valuation per pupil between 1945-62 were identified with the highest proportion of residential construction prior to 1945, and the least proportion of residential construction between 1956-62, among the three classifica tions of growth districts* Dwelling Unit Occupancy Items 28, 29, and 30 of the questionnaire were developed to categorize the residential population in California growth school districts by type of dwelling unit and degree of home ownership. The districts which had been selected for study were asked to estimate the percentage of single-dwelling unit occupancy, the percentage of apartment occupancy, and the percentage of residents who were rent ing or leasing in their respective districts. Apartment house occupancy was defined as dwellings of six or more units, in order to distinguish apartments from in ter mediate types of multiple units. Single-dwelling units were defined as one house, one lot, to distinguish a single residential unit from any form of multiple unit. One hundred eighty-three districts responded to this particular inquiry. The distribution of their responses appears 228 opposite items 28, 29, and 30 of Table 44. Analysis of total responses A first analysis of the responses reveals that a preponder** ance of residents in the growth districts lived in single dwelling units. Ninety per cent of the responding districts reported that 30 per cent or less of their residents occupied apartment dwellings. A strong tendency toward home ownership was also indicated by the response. Two-thirds of the districts reported that less than 30 per cent of their residents were renting or leasing. At the extrem es, eight districts out of 183 clearly indicated that a majority of their residents were occupying dwellings on a rental or lease arrangem ent. Following the tabulation of the total responses, the 183 responding districts were identified as above-median or below- median in accordance with their position when ranked with the original 412 growth school districts in the three classifications described in detail on page 216. Residents occupying single dwelling units The problem was to determine whether there were any differing characteristics in the type of residence occupied by 229 residents among the three classifications of growth districts. In item 28 the preponderance of responses fell in the last two columns. An effort was made to analyze the responses, however, by grouping them into columns A, B, C, and D (76 responses), columns C, D, and E (179 responses), columns D and E (165 r e sponses), and column E (107 responses). The above median r e sponses in each of the above groupings were converted into percent ages with the following results: P R O P O R T IO N O F RESPONSES ___ 0 to 80 30 to 100 61 to 100 81 to 100 Classification__________P e r Cent P er Cent P er Cent P e r Cent I 54 51 51 47 II 41 51 50 57 HI 64 50 49 40 Reading from left to right, the largest-grow th districts, Classification I, were identified less frequently each time a higher percentage of single-dwelling unit occupancy was reported. It would perhaps be more accurate to state that the proportion of large school districts did not increase in any of the columns, with each column representing a higher percentage of single-dwelling unit occupancy. Among the school districts reporting under 80 per cent single-dwelling unit occupancy, only four out of ten were identified as fastest-grow th school districts, Classification H; among the districts 230 reporting 81 to 100 per cent of single-dwelling unit occupancy, approximately six out of ten were identified in this classification. Classification X IX , the districts which maintained a favor able ratio of assessed valuation per pupil, was identified most fre quently with the districts reporting under 80 per cent of single dwelling unit occupancy, and least frequently with the districts reporting in the 81 to 100 per cent column among all three growth cla s s ifi cation s . Residents occupying apartm ent- type dwellings In item 29, the responses were grouped into column A (115 responses), columns A and B (171 responses), columns A, B, and C (180 responses), and columns B, C, D, and E (68 responses). The above-median responses in each of the above groups were con verted into percentages with the following results: P R O P O R T ION OF RESPONSES ___ 0 to 9 0 to 29 0 to 60 10 to 100 Classification__________P e r Cent P er Cent P e r Cent Per Cent I 48 52 52 57 H 56 50 49 40 IK 44 49 50 59 231 Reading from left to right, the largest-grow th districts, Classification 1, were identified least frequently with the districts which reported under 10 per cent apartment house occupancy, and m ost frequently with the districts which reported in the 10 to 100 per cent column. The fastest-growth districts. Classification X I, were identified with decreasing frequency in each column across the page, and were identified with only 40 per cent of the responses which reported 10 to 100 per cent apartment house occupancy. In Classification X IX , the districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil between 1945-62 were identified the least frequently with the districts which reported less than 10 per cent apartment house occupancy, and the m ost frequently with the districts which reported 10 per cent or more of apartment house occupancy. The increase was consistent across the page. Residents renting or leasing The responses in item 30 were more broadly distributed among the columns than the previous item, and the grouping arrange ment was adjusted with this in mind. The responses were grouped into column A (56 responses), columns A and B (121 responses), columns B, C, D, and E (127 responses), and columns C, D, and E 232 (62 responses). The above-median responses in each of the group ings were converted into percentages with the following results: P R O P O R T I ON OF R E SPONSES ___ 0 to 9 0 to 29 10 to 100 30 to 100 Classification P er Cent P er Cent P er Cent P er Cent I 52 56 50 39 II 63 60 47 35 III 45 45 53 61 Reading from left to right, the largest-growth districts, Classification I, were more frequently identified with the districts which reported in the middle range of rental occupancy than with the districts which reported an extremely high percentage or an extremeLy low percentage of rental occupancy. They were identified less with the districts reporting in the upper percentage range of rental occu pancy than at the other extreme. The fastest-growth districts, Classification II, were identified with six out of ten districts reporting under 10 per cent of rental occupancy. This frequency declined in each column across the page, and they were identified with less than four out of ten dis tricts reporting 30 to 100 per cent of rental occupancy. In Classification III, the districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil were least identified with districts reporting under 30 per cent rental occupancy, and 233 most identified with districts reporting more than 30 per cent rental occupancy, among all three classifications. Summary of the analysis of items 28, 29, and 30 Items 28, 29, and 30 of the questionnaire were developed to examine the characteristics of growth school districts in respect to type of residential units and degree of home ownership. One hundred eighty-three districts responded to this particular inquiry. The findings are sum m arized as follows: 1. A high percentage of single-dwelling occupancy was found, and a sm all proportion of residents occupying apartment-type dwellings. Ninety per cent of the responding districts reported that between 60 and 100 per cent of their residents occupied single-dwelling units. At the extreme, twelve districts reported that 30 per cent or more of their residents occupied apartment units. 2. Two districts reported that 81 to 100 per cent of their residents occupied apartment-type dwell ings. Inasmuch as these districts qualified as growth districts between 1945-62, it would appear that, in these districts at least, families with school age children were found with high frequency in apartment units. Two-thirds of the districts reported that less than 30 per cent of their residents were renting or leasing. At the extreme, one district reported that 81 to 100 per cent of its residents were renting or leasing. In respect to the three growth classifications which has been established it was found that: (a) Among the districts which reported higher percentages of single-dwelling unit occupancy, the largest-grow th districts were identified less frequently, the fastest-growth districts were identified more frequently, and the districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil were identified less frequently. (b) Among the districts which reported higher percentages of apartment house occupancy, the largest-grow th districts were identified 235 more frequently, the fastest-growth districts were identified less frequently, and the districts which maintained a favor able ratio of assessed valuation per pupil were identified less frequently. (c) Among the districts which reported higher percentages of rental occupancy, the largest- growth districts were identified less fre quently, the fastest-growth districts were identified less frequently, and the districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil were identified more frequently. Size and Condition of Dwelling Units Items 31, 32, and 33 of the questionnaire were developed to categorize the residential population in growth school districts by size and condition of dwelling units. The districts which had been selected for study were asked to estimate the percentage of residents in the district occupying 1, 500 or m ore square feet of living space, the percentage of residents occupying 1, 000 or less square feet of living space, and the number of residents occupying substandard 236 units, in their respective districts. The square footage delineations were arbitrarily selected as a means of determining extremes in living space. An informal survey was conducted of real estate advertising in several com munities. In these advertisem ents, dwelling units of 1,500 or more square feet were frequently described as "homes for the large family" and contained three to four bedrooms. Dwelling units of 1,000 or less square feet were fre quently either small two bedroom single units or apartment units designed for single persons or working couples. Substandard units were not defined in the questionnaire, and it was therefore necessary for the respondents to develop their own criteria for designating a unit as substandard. Several respond ents reported that they had used census studies or other community surveys in replying to this item. The distribution of responses is found opposite item s 31, 32, and 33 of Table 44. Analysis of the total responses One hundred eighty-two districts responded to this p a r ticular inquiry. A first analysis of the responses revealed that in these districts a slightly larger proportion of the population was 237 living in small dwelling units than in very large dwelling units* Nearly half of the districts reported that 30 to 100 per cent of their population resided in units of 1,000 or less square feet. Slightly over one-third of the districts reported that m ore than 30 per cent of their residents lived in units of 1, 500 square feet or larger. At the extremes, twenty-eight districts reported 61 per cent or more of their population living in very large residential units, and forty-six districts reported 61 per cent or m ore of their population living in small residential units. Forty-eight districts reported the presence of 10 per cent or more substandard units. Nine of these districts indicated that 30 to 60 per cent of their population lived in substandard units. None of the districts reported more than 60 per cent of their population residing in substandard units. Following the tabulation of the total responses, the dis tricts which responded to items 31, 32, and 33 were identified as above-median or below-median in accordance with their position in the original ranking of the 412 growth districts, in the three classifi cations described in detail on page 216. Residents occupying 1,500 or m ore square feet In item 31, the above-median responses were grouped 238 into column A (36 responses), columns A and B f c (113 responses), columns B, C, D, and E (146 responses), and columns C, D, and E (69 responses). These groupings were converted into percentage responses with the following results: P R O P ORTION OF RE S P O N SES___ 0 to 9 0 to 20 10 to 100 30 to 100 Classification__________P er Cent P er Cent P er Cent P er Cent I 56 49 49 51 II 67 49 48 54 HI 53 52 49 46 Reading from left to right, the largest-grow th districts, Classification I, were identified slightly less frequently with the dis tricts which reported 10 per cent or more of residences of 1, 500 or more square feet. The identification of the fastest-growth districts, Classification H, declined 20 per cent across the first three columns; then a reversal of this trend was suggested in the final column where 30 to 100 percent of residences of over 1, 500 square feet were reported. In Classification HI, the identification of districts which had maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil was less frequent in each column across the page. 239 Residents occupying 1,000 or less square feet In item 32, the above-median responses were grouped into column A (35 responses), columns A and B (92 responses), columns B, C, D, and E (147 responses), and columns C, D# and E (90 responses). These groupings were converted into percentage responses with the following results: P ROP O R T ION OF RE S PONSES ___ 0 to 9 0 to 29 10 to 100 30 to 100 Classification P er Cent P er Cent P er Cent P er Cent I 57 54 49 46 II 77 58 45 44 UI 40 48 52 52 Reading from left to right, the largest-grow th districts. Classification I, were identified less frequently in each column as the percentage of units of 1, 000 or less square feet was increased. The fastest-growth districts, Classification n , were identified with less frequency in each column as the percentage of units of 1, 000 or less square feet was increased. Classification TIT , the growth districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil were identified more frequently in each column as the percentage of dwelling units of 1, 000 or less square feet was increased. 240 Residents occupying substandard units Inasmuch as item 33 had a preponderance of responses under column A, the above-median responses were grouped into three columns instead of the usual four: column A (134 responses), columns A and B (173 responses), and columns B and C (48 responses). The groupings were converted into percentage responses with the follow ing results: P R O P _ O R n 0_N_ _0 _ F _ _RE S P £ N S E S _ 0 to 9 0 to 29 10 to 60 Classification__________P er Cent__________P er Cent P er Cent I 53 51 39 II 59 50 25 HI 48 49 52 Reading from left to right, the largest-growth districts, Classification I, were identified less frequently in each column as the percentage of substandard dwelling units was increased. The fastest-growth districts, Classification H, declined by over one-half in frequency of identification between the first column and the last column, where 10 to 60 per cent of substandard units was reported. In Classification m , the districts which had maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil were the least affected by an increasing percentage of substandard units. If 241 anything, this classification was identified more frequently as the percentage of substandard units was increased. Summary of the analysis of items 31, 32, and 33 Items 31, 32, and 33 of the questionnaire were designed to categorize the residential population in growth school districts by size and condition of dwelling units. The districts which had been selected for study were asked to estimate the percentage of residents living in dwelling units of 1, 500 square feet or more, 1, 000 square feet or less, and substandard dwelling units. The responses were tabulated in term s of total responses and also as to whether they fell above or below the median of the entire 412 growth districts in respect to total average daily attend ance, percentage of increase in average daily attendance, and assessed valuation per pupil. The findings are sum m arized below: 1. Residents of growth districts living in units of 1,500 or more square feet were reported less frequently than residents living in 1,000 square feet or less. At the very extrem es, eight dis tricts reported that 81 to 100 per cent of their residents lived in the larger dwelling units, and fourteen districts reported that 81 to 100 per cent of their residents lived in units of 1, 000 square feet or less. Substandard units were reported very infrequently by the responding districts. At the very extrem es, nine districts reported that 30 to 60 per cent of their residential housing was substandard. Since the term "substandard" had not been defined in the question naire, this item may have been subject to differing interpretations. In respect to the three growth classifications which had been established, it was found that: (a) As the percentage of residential units of 1, 500 square feet or more was increased, the re porting districts were identified less frequently as the largest-growth districts, less frequently as the fastest-growth districts, and less frequently as the districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil between 1945 and 1962, (b) As the percentage of residential units of 1, 000 or less square feet was increased, the r e porting districts were identified less frequently 243 as the largest-grow th districts, and more frequently as the districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil between 1945 and 1962. (c) As the percentage of residents occupying sub standard units was increased, the reporting districts were identified less frequently as the largest-grow th districts, less frequently as the fastest-growth districts, and more frequently as the districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil between 1945 and 1962. Industrialization of Growth School D istricts Items 34, 35, and 36 of the questionnaire were developed to estimate the degree of industrialization and urbanization in the growth school districts of California. The districts which had been selected for study were asked to estimate the percentage of residents living in partially commercialized or industrialized areas, the p er centage of working residents who were subject to recurring layoffs or seasonal employment, and the number of female residents who were employed full time in their respective districts. 244 One hundred eighty-three districts responded to this p a r ticular inquiry. The distribution of their responses appears opposite items 34, 35, and 36 of Table 44. Analysis of the total responses A first analysis of the responses indicated that, in three- fourths of the responding districts, there was believed to be a clear demarcation between residential areas and comm ercial or industrial ized areas. One hundred forty-three districts reported that less than 10 per cent of their residents lived in such areas, and no district reported m ore than 60 per cent of their population living in indus trialized neighborhoods. At the extreme, four districts indicated that 30 to 60 per cent of their residential population lived in com m ercialized or industrialized areas. The incidence of working residents subject to recurring layoffs or seasonal employment was reported in all columns. Two- thirds of the responding districts reported that 10 per cent or more of their working residents were in this category. At the extreme, one district reported that 81 to 100 per cent of its working residents were subject to recurring layoffs and seasonal employment. Nine out of ten districts reported that over 10 per cent of their adult females were engaged in full-time occupations. At the extrem es, fourteen districts reported 0 to 9 per cent of their adult 245 females in this category, and four districts reported that 61 to 80 per cent of their adult females were engaged in full-time employment. Following the tabulation of the total responses, the 183 responding districts were identified as above-median or below-median in accordance with their position when ranked with the original 412 growth school districts in the three classifications described in detail on page 216. Residents living in partially industrialized areas The problem was to determine whether there were any differing characteristics in the type of neighborhoods occupied by residents among the three classifications of growth districts. In item 34, all of the responses fell into columns A, B, and C. An effort was made to analyze the responses by grouping them into column A (143 responses}, columns A and B (178 responses), and columns B and C (39 responses). The above-median responses in each of the groupings were converted into percentages with the follow ing results: P R O P O R T I ON OF R E S P O NSES _____ 0 to 9 0 to 29 10 to 60 Classification P er Cent P er Cent P e r Cent I 48 50 59 II 55 52 36 IL L 45 48 61 246 Reading from left to right, the identification of the largest- growth districts, Classification I, among the responding districts increased in each column as the percentage of residents living in in dustrialized areas was increased. The proportion of the fastest-grow th districts, Classifi cation II, reporting residents living in industrialized areas, decreased in each column as the percentage of residents living in industrialized areas was increased. In Classification III, the proportion of districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil increased in each column as the percentage of residents living in industrialized areas was increased. Working residents subject to recurring layoffs, etc. In item 35, the above-median responses were grouped into column A (63 responses), columns A and B (139 responses), columns B, C, D, and £ (120 responses), and columns C, D, and £ (44 responses). These groupings were converted into percentage responses with the following results: 247 P R O P O R TION OF R E SP O N SE S___ 0 to 9 0 to 29 10 to 100 30 to 100 Classification__________P e r Cent P e r Cent P er Cent P er Cent I 48 53 52 43 II 68 55 42 39 HI 44 48 53 55 Reading from left to right, in Classification I, the largest-growth districts displayed no strong tendencies until the last column, where the highest percentage of working residents subject to recurring layoffs or seasonal employment was reported. The identi fication of the largest-growth districts reporting in that column decreased sharply. The identification of the fastest-growth districts, Classification n , dipped in each column across the page as the p e r centage of residents living in industrialized areas was increased. In Classification III, the identification of the districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil increased in each column across the page as the percentage of re s i dents living in industrialized areas was increased. Fem ale residents engaged in full time occupations In item 36, various combinations of columnar groupings of the above-median responses were attempted. None of these 248 experiments produced the slightest evidence of any differing charac teristics among the three classifications of growth districts in this respect. It was concluded that th e incidence of female employment, while present to some degree in nearly all of the growth districts, was also widely distributed among all of the classifications of growth districts. Summary of the analysis of items 34, 35, and 36 Items 34, 35, and 36 of the questionnaire were designed to estimate the degree of industrialization or urbanization in California growth school districts. The districts which had been selected for study were asked to estimate the percentage of residents living in partially industrialized or commercialized areas, the percentage of working residents subject to recurring layoffs or seasonal employment, and the percentage of adult females engaged in full-time employment. The responses were tabulated in term s of total response and also as to whether they fell above or below the median of the entire 412 growth districts in respect to total average daily attend ance, percentage of increase in average daily attendance, and assessed valuation per pupil. The findings are sum m arized below: The proportion of residents living in partially commercialized or industrialized areas was very light among growth districts in general. One hundred forty-three out of 182 districts reported that less than 10 per cent of their population lived in such areas, and, at the extreme, four districts indicated that 30 to 60 per cent of their residential population lived in industrialized or commercialized a re a s. Two-thirds of the districts reported that 10 per cent or m ore of their working residents were subject to recurring layoffs and seasonal employment. At the extrem es, sixty-three districts reported 0 to 9 per cent of their working residents in this category, and one district reported 81 to 100 per cent of its residents in this category. The incidence of full-time female employment was a widespread characteristic of the respond ing growth districts. Nine out of ten districts reported that over 10 per cent of their adult 250 female population worked full time. At the extrem es, fourteen dis — tricts reported that 0 to 9 per cent of their adult females were en gaged in full-time employment, and four districts reported that 81 to 100 per cent of their adult females were employed. 4. In respect to the three growth classifications which had been established, it was found that: (a) As the percentage of residents living in partially industrialized areas was increased, the reporting districts were identified more frequently as the largest-grow th districts, less frequently as the fastest-growth dis tricts, and more frequently as the districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil between 1945 and 1962. (b) As the percentage of residents subject to recurring layoffs or seasonal employment was increased, the trend in the largest- growth districts was inconclusive; however, the reporting districts were identified less frequently as the fastest-growth districts, and m ore frequently as the districts which 251 . which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil between 1945 and 1962. (c) As the percentage of adult female employment was increased, approximately the same p ro portions were maintained within the three growth classifications. Personal Income of Residents Items 37 and 38 of the questionnaire were developed to determine the degree, if any, of district-w ide segregation by family income among the growth school districts of California. At the time the questionnaire was in preparation, the average family income of California residents was reported at slightly under $7, 000 per year. The districts which had been selected for study were asked to estimate the percentage of residents whose family income was $10,000 or more per year, and the percentage of residents whose family income was $6, 000 or less per year, in their respective dis- tric ts. These two extremes of income were chosen as being sufficiently above and below, respectively, the state-wide average family income for significance. One hundred eighty-five districts responded to this p a r- 252 ticular inquiry. The distribution of their responses appears opposite items 37 and 38 of Table 44. Analysis of the total responses A first analysis of the responses revealed some indication of district-w ide segregation by personal family income in both the upper income and lower income range. In the upper income range, fifty districts reported that less than 10 per cent of their families earned $10, 000 per year or m ore, while forty-nine districts reported that one-third or m ore of their families were in this income bracket. The remaining districts reported between 10 and 29 per cent of their families earning $10, 000 or more per year. In the lower income range, twenty-two districts reported that less than 10 per cent of their families earned $6, 000 per year or less, while fourteen districts reported that over 80 per cent of their residents were in this income bracket. Following the tabulation of the total responses, the 185 districts which responded to items 37 and 38 were identified as above median or below-median in accordance with their position in the original ranking of the 412 growth districts in the three classifications described in detail on page 216. 253 Fam ilies earning $10,000 or m ore per year In item 37, the above-median responses were grouped into column A (50 responses), columns A and B (136 responses), columns B, C, D, and E (135 responses), and columns C, D, and E (49 responses). These groupings were converted into percentage responses with the following results: PR O PO R TIQ N O F RES PON S E S 0 to 9 0 to 29 10 to 100 30 to 100 Classification__________P er Cent P er Cent P er Cent P e r Cent I 40 49 53 49 II 46 44 52 67 HI 58 54 46 37 Reading from left to right, the largest-grow th districts. Classification I, were identified with increasing frequency in each column across the page as the percentage of families earning $10, 000 per year or more was increased. This tendency faltered in the final column, where the highest percentage of upper income families was reported. The fastest-growth districts, Classification H, were identified with increasing frequency in the two columns at the far right, where the highest percentage of upper income families was reported. 254 In Classification III, those districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil between 1945 and 1962 were identified with decreasing frequency in each column across the page as higher percentages of upper income families were reported. Fam ilies earning $6, 000 per year or less In item 38, the above-median responses were grouped into column A (22 responses), columns A and B (78 responses), columns B, C, D, and E (163 responses), and columns C, D, and E (107 responses). These groupings were converted into percentage re sponses with the following results: P R O P OR T ION OF R ESPO N S E S___ 0 to 9 10 to 29 10 to 100 30 to 100 Classification__________P e r Cent P e r Cent P er Cent P er Cent I 45 56 50 45 II 59 59 49 44 IH 36 41 52 56 Reading from left to right, the largest growth districts, Classification I, had the least identification at the two extremes: in column A where the least percentage of families earning $6, 000 or less per year was reported, and in columns C, D, and E where the highest percentage of families earning $6, 000 or less per year was reported. The fastest-growth districts. Classification XI, were identified with decreasing frequency in the two columns at the far right where the highest percentages of families earning $6, 000 per year or less were reported. In Classification III, the districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil between 1945 and 1962 increased consistently in each column across the page as higher percentages of families earning $6, 000 or less per year were reported. Summary of the analysis of items 37 and 38 Items 37 and 38 of the questionnaire were designed to determine the degree, if any, of district-w ide segregation by family income among the growth school districts of California. The dis tricts which had been selected for study were asked to estimate the percentage of families earning $10, 000 or more per year and the percentage of families earning $6, 000 or less per year. The responses were tabulated in term s of total responses, and also as to whether they fell above or below the median of the entire 412 growth districts in respect to total average daily attend ance, percentage of increase in average daily attendance, and 256 assessed valuation per pupil. The findings are sum m arized below: 1. Some indication of district-w ide segregation by personal family income was found in both the upper income and lower income range. At the extrem es, one district reported that 81 to 100 per cent of its families earned $10, 000 per year or more; fourteen districts reported that 81 to 100 per cent of their families earned $6, 000 per year or less. Fifty districts reported no signifi cant percentage of families in the higher income range; twenty-two districts reported no significant percentage of families in the lower income range. 2. In respect to the three growth classifications which had been established, it was found that: (a) As the percentage of families earning $10,000 per year or more was increased, the reporting districts were identified m ore frequently as the largest-grow th districts, m ore frequently as the fastest-growth districts, and less fre quently as districts which maintained a favor able ratio of assessed valuation per pupil between 1945 and 1962. 257 (b) As the percentage of families earning $6, 000 per year or less was increased, the reporting districts were identified less frequently as the fastest-growth districts, and more frequently as the districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil between 1945 and 1962. Educational-Occupational Level of Adult Residents Items 39, 40, and 41 of the questionnaire were developed to determine the degree, if any, of district-wide segregation by educational-occupational background of residents among the growth school districts of California. The districts which had been selected for study were asked to estimate the percentage of residents engaged in occupations associated with a college or university background, the percentage of residents in occupations associated with a trade- technical background, and the percentage of residents in occupations demanding no special academic training, in their respective districts. One hundred eighty-three districts responded to this p ar ticular inquiry. The distribution of their responses appears opposite items 39, 40, and 41 of Table 44. 258 A n a ly sis of the total r e sp o n se s A first analysis of the responses indicated a very slight tendency toward district-wide segregation by educational-occupational background at the "higher education" level. Although three-fourths of the districts reported that less than 30 per cent of their residents were in this category, the remaining districts reported residents in this category up to and exceeding 80 per cent of the district popula tion. Adults in occupations associated with a secondary or trade-tech education were more evenly distributed among the growth districts. Eight out of ten districts reported residents in this cate gory between the 10 to 80 per cent range. At the extrem es, fifteen districts reported that less than 10 per cent of their residents were in this category, and two districts reported that 80 to 100 per cent of their working residents were in this category. A slightly stronger tendency toward segregation of work ing residents in the "no special academic training" category was indicated by the response. Six out of ten districts reported this group in the 10 to 80 per cent range. At the extrem es, forty-four districts reported that less than 10 per cent of their residents were in this category and six districts reported that more than 80 per cent of their working residents were in occupations requiring no special 259 academic training. Following the tabulation of the total responses, the 183 responding districts were identified as above-median or below- median in accordance with their positions when ranked with the original 412 growth school districts in the three classifications de scribed in detail on page 216. Adults in occupations associated with a college background The problem was to determine whether there were any- differing characteristics in the educational-occupational backgrounds of working residents among the three classifications of growth dis tricts. In item 39, the above-median responses were grouped into column A (52 responses), columns A and B (137 responses), columns B, C, D, and E (131 responses), and columns C, D, and E (46 responses). The above-median responses in each of the group ings were converted into percentages with the following results: P R O P O R T I ON OF R ESPONSES ___ 0 to 9 0 to 29 10 to 100 30 to 100 Classification__________P e r Cent P e r Cent P e r Cent P e r Cent I 42 50 53 48 U 40 43 53 72 III 60 55 46 33 260 Reading from left to right, the largest-growth districts, Classification I, were identified less frequently in the columns at either end where the least percentage and the highest percentage of working residents associated with a college or university training were reported. Classification II, the fastest-growth districts, were identified with increasing frequency in each column across the page as higher percentages of college-trained residents were reported. The districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil, Classification III, were identified with decreasing frequency in each column across the page. Adults in occupations associated with a trade-tech training In item 40, the above-median responses were grouped into column A (15 responses), columns A and B (75 responses), columns B, C, D, and E (168 responses), and columns C, D, and E (108 responses). These groupings were converted into percentage responses with the following results: P ROPORTION OF R E S P O NSES 0 to 9 0 to 29 10 to 100 30 to 100 Classification__________P e r Cent P e r Cent P er Cent P er Cent I 26 39 51 56 H 35 44 51 52 HI 35 52 51 50 261 Reading from left to right, in Classification I, the largest-growth districts were identified with increasing frequency in each column across the page as higher percentages of residents with a secondary or trade-tech background were reported. In Classification II, the fastest-growth districts increased in each column across the page as higher percentages of residents with a secondary or trade-tech background were reported. The districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil, Classification II, were identified with decreasing frequency in each column across the page. Adults in occupations associated with no special academic training In item 41, the above-median responses were grouped into column A (44 responses), columns A and B (111 responses), columns B, C, D, and E (139 responses), and columns C, D, and E (72 responses). These groupings were converted into percentage responses with the following results: P R O P O R TION OF RESPONSES ___ 0 to 9 0 to 20 10 to 100 30 to 100 Classification P e r Cent P e r Cent P er Cent P e r Cent I 48 55 50 42 II 73 57 44 41 HI 43 47 53 58 262 Reading from left to right, identification of the largest- growth districts, Classification I, in each column tended to be lowest at the two extremes where the least percentage and the highest p er centage of working residents in this category were reported. In Classification II, identification of the fastest-growth districts decreased consistently across the page as higher percent ages of residents with no special academic training were reported. Identification of the districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil, Classification III, increased consistently in each column across the page. Summary of the analysis of items 39, 40, and 41 Items 39, 40, and 41 of the questionnaire were developed to estimate the degree, if any, of district-wide segregation by edu cational-occupational background of residents among the growth school districts of California. The districts which had been selected for the study were asked to estimate the percentage of working residents whose occupa tions were associated with college or university training, the p er centage of working residents whose occupations were associated with secondary or trade-tech training, and the percentage of working residents whose occupations were associated with no special academic 263 training. The responses were tabulated in term s of total responses, and also as to whether they fell above or below the median of the entire 412 growth districts in respect to total average daily attend ance, percentage of increase in average daily attendance, and assessed valuation per pupil. The findings are sum m arized below: 1. Some evidence was found of segregation on a district-wide basis in respect to working residents associated with a college or university training. Fifty-two districts reported less than 10 per cent of their residents were in this category, and forty- six districts reported that 30 to 100 per cent of their residents were in this category. One district reported that 81 to 100 per cent of its working residents were employed in occupations associated with a college or university background. 2. Eight out of ten districts reported that between 10 and 80 per cent of their working residents were in occupations associated with a secondary or trade- tech background. At the extremes, fifteen districts reported that less than 10 per cent of their working residents were in this category, and two districts reported that 80 to 100 per cent of their working residents were in this category. Six out of ten districts reported that between 10 to 80 per cent of their working residents were in occupations associated with no special academic training. At the extremes, forty-four districts reported that less than 10 per cent of their working residents were in this category, and six districts reported that between 80 to 100 per cent of their working residents were in this category. In respect to the three growth classifications which had been established, it was found that: (a) As the percentage of working residents associated with college or university training was increased, the trend in the largest-grow th districts was inconclusive; however, the reporting districts were identified more frequently as the fastest-growth districts, and less frequently as the districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil between 1945 and 1962. (b) As the percentage of working residents 265 associated with a secondary or trade- tech background was increased, the report ing districts were identified more frequently as the largest-grow th districts, m ore fre quently as the fastest-growth districts, and less frequently as the districts which main tained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil between 1945 and 1962. (c) As the percentage of working residents associated with no special academic training was increased, the reporting districts were identified less frequently as the largest- growth districts, less frequently as the fastest-growth districts, and more frequently as the districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil between 1945 and 1962. Racial and Age Composition of Growth School Districts Items 42, 43, and 44 of the questionnaire were developed to estimate the degree, if any, of district-w ide segregation by racial 266 stock or age composition in the growth school districts of California. The districts which had been selected for study were asked to estimate the percentage of Negro residents in the population, the percentage of bilingual residents in the population, and the p e r centage of residents who were fifty years old or older. There was some variation in the response to this p a r ticular inquiry. One hundred eighty-four districts responded to the first item, 186 districts responded to the second item, and 183 dis tricts to the last item. The distribution of the responses are found opposite items 42, 43, and 44 of Table 44. Analysis of total responses A first analysis of the responses revealed only eleven districts reporting a percentage of Negro residents higher than the normal ratio of Negroes to whites in the California State population. At the extreme, two districts reported that a substantial majority of their residents were Negro. Two out of five districts reported that 10 per cent or m ore of their residential population was bilingual, and, at the extreme, six districts reported that 61 to 80 per cent of their residents were bilingual. Some imbalance was indicated in the age distribution of 267 the residential population on a district-wide basis, considering that eleven districts reported that 0 to 9 per cent of their residents were age fifty or more, and sixteen districts reported that over 60 per cent of their residential population was age fifty or more. At the extreme, one growth district reported that 81 to 100 per cent of its residents were in this senior age group. Following the tabulation of the total responses, the dis- tricts which responded to items 42, 43, and 44 were identified as above-median or below-median in accordance with their position in the original ranking of the 412 growth districts in the three classifi cations described in detail on page 216, Negro residents in the residential population Since only twelve districts responded among columns B, C, D, and E in this item, the distribution was considered to be too negligible for detailed analysis. The proportion of districts in each of the three classifications was interesting, however, in its resemblance to the general trend of Negro movement into large urban areas which was described earlier. Two out of three districts which reported a 10 per cent or larger Negro population were dis tricts which had the largest school population; only one out of three were districts classified as fastest-growth districts. 268 Bilingual residents in the population In item 43, the above-median responses were grouped into column A (109 responses), columns A and B (163 responses), columns B, C, D, and E (77 responses), and columns C, D, and E (23 responses). These groupings were converted into percentage responses with the following results: PROPO RTION OF R E S PONSES 0 to 9 0 to 20 10 to 100 30 to 100 Classification P er Cent P e r Cent P er Cent P er Cent I 51 51 47 39 II 56 51 42 43 III 46 48 56 65 Reading from left to right, it was observed that the dis tricts in Classification I, the largest growth districts, displayed a sharp decline in the last column where the percentage of bilingual residents was highest. Identification of the fastest-growth districts, Classifica tion II, declined gradually but consistently as the percentage of bilingual residents increased. The districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil, Classification 1 1 1 , were identified with increasing frequency as the percentage of bilingual residents was 269 increased. Residents age fifty or more in the population In item 44, the above-median responses were grouped into column A (26 responses), columns A and B (126 responses), column B (100 responses), and columns C and D (57 responses). These groupings were converted into percentage responses with the following results: P R O P ORTION OF R E 5PON_S_E_S__ 0 to 9 0 to 29 10 to 29 30 to 100 Classification__________P er Cent P er Cent P e r Cent P er Cent I 62 55 53 37 II 77 61 57 23 HI 31 43 46 65 Reading from left to right, the largest-grow th districts, Classification I, were identified with decreasing frequency in each column across the page as the proportion of residents age fifty and over was increased. Identification of the fastest-growth districts, Classifica tion II, was made with decreasing frequency in each column across the page. In Classification III, the districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil were identified with 270 increasing frequency in each column across the page among the districts reporting higher percentage of older residents. Summary of the analysis of items 42t 43, and 44 Items 42, 43, and 44 of the questionnaire were designed to determine the relationship between age and racial composition of the population in California growth school districts. The districts which had been selected for study were asked to estimate the percentage of Negro residents in their popula tion, the percentage of bilingual residents, and the percentage of residents who were fifty years old or m ore. The responses were tabulated in term s of totals, and also as to whether they fell above or below the median of the entire 412 growth school districts in respect to total average daily attend ance, percentage of increase in average daily attendance, and assessed valuation per pupil. The findings are sum m arized below: 1. Evidence was found of racial segregation on a district-wide basis, but only in two districts which reported a substantial majority of Negro residents. In all but eleven of the reporting districts the ratio of Negroes to whites was well within the limits of a normal population distribution. Two out of five growth districts reported that iO per cent or more of their residential population was bilingual in character. At the extreme, six districts reported that 61 to 80 per cent of their residents were bilingual. Evidence was found of imbalance in the age dis tribution of the population in growth districts. At the extrem es, eleven districts reported 0 to 9 per cent residents age fifty and over, and sixteen districts reported that more than 60 per cent of their residents were age fifty and over. Both extremes were outside the lim its of a normal age distribution of the population. In respect to the three growth classifications which had been established, it was found that: (a) As the percentage of bilingual residents in the population increased, the reporting districts were identified less frequently as the largest-grow th districts, less frequently as the fastest-growth districts, and m ore frequently as districts which maintained a 272 favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil between 1945 and 1962, (b) As the percentage of residents age fifty and over increased, the reporting districts were identified less frequently as the largest-growth districts, less frequently as the fastest- growth districts, and more frequently as districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil between 1945 and 1962, (c) The imbalance of age distribution reported in finding 3 above was more apparent in the fastest-growth districts than in either of the other classifications. Residential Transiency in Growth Districts Items 45 and 46 of the questionnaire were developed to estimate the degree of residential transiency in growth school dis tricts of California, The districts which had been selected for study were asked to estimate the percentage of residents who had lived in the district three years or less, and the percentage of residents who had 273 lived in the district ten years or more, in their respective districts. One hundred eighty-three districts responded to this particular inquiry. The distribution of their responses appears opposite items 45 and 46 of Table 44. Analysis of total response A first analysis of the responses revealed that longevity of residency differed widely among the responding growth districts. Sixteen districts reported that 61 to 100 per cent of their residents had lived in the district three years or less, and one district reported 81 to 100 per cent of its residents in this category. Forty-four districts reported that 61 to 80 per cent of their residents had lived in the district ten years or more, and five districts reported 81 to 100 per cent of their residents in this category. When the extremes were eliminated, 66 per cent of the districts reported 10 to 60 per cent of their residents living in the district ten years or more, and 85 per cent of the districts reported 10 to 60 per cent of their residents living in the district three years or less. Following the tabulation of the total responses, the dis tricts which responded to items 45 and 46 were identified as above- 274 median or below-median in accordance with their postion in the original ranking of the 412 growth districts in the three classifications described on page 216. Residents in districts three years or less The problem was to determine if there were any differing characteristics among the three classifications of growth districts in respect to residential longevity. In item 45, the above-median responses were grouped into column A (11 responses), columns A and B (109 responses), columns B, C, D, and E (172 responses), and columns C, D, and E (74 responses). These groupings were converted into percentage responses with the following results: P R O P O R T ION OF R E S P O NSES 0 to 9 0 to 29 10 to 100 30 to 100 Classification__________P er Cent P er Cent P e r Cent P e r Cent I 45 45 49 55 II 54 41 49 64 IQ 45 51 51 49 In Classification I, reading from left to right, the largest-grow th districts were identified more frequently among the districts responding in the last two columns where the percentage of short-term residents was the highest. 275 Identification of the fastest-growth districts, C lassifica tion II, was made less frequently in the middle range and most frequently at the two extreme columns, particularly in the last column on the right, where the percentage of short-term residents was highest. Identification in Classification III of the districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil was of approximately the same proportion in each column across the page. Residents in district ten years or more In item 46, the above-median responses were grouped into column A (17 responses), columns A and B (75 responses), columns B, C, D, and E (166 responses), and columns C, D, and E (108 responses). These groupings were converted into percentage responses with the following results: P R O P O R T ION OF R E SP O N SES 0 to 9 0 to 29 10 to 100 30 to 100 Classification__________P er Cent P e r Cent P e r Cent P e r Cent I 71 64 47 39 II 94 83 46 28 HI 29 33 52 62 Reading from left to right, it is immediately apparent that the proportion of residents living in the district ten years or 276 m ore exhibited definite characteristics in each classification of growth districts. Identification of the largest-grow th districts, Classifica tion I, was made in seven out of ten districts responding that under 10 per cent of their residents had lived in the district ten years or more. This identification decreased in frequency in each column across the page. In Classification II, identification of the fastest-growth districts was made in nine out of ten districts responding that under 10 per cent of their residents had lived in the district ten years or m ore. This identification decreased in frequency in each column, so that by the final column, less than three out of ten responding districts were in this classification. Identification of the districts which had maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil, Classification III, revealed a diametrically opposite tendency. The frequency of identification increased in each column across the page, and this classification was identified most frequently with districts which had a high percentage of long-term residents. 277 Summary of the analysis of items 45 and 46 Items 45 and 46 of the questionnaire were designed to estimate the degree of residential transiency in California growth districts. The districts which had been selected for study were asked to estimate the percentage of residents who had resided in the district three years or less, and the percentage of residents who had resided in the district ten years or more. The responses were tabulated in term s of totals, and also as to whether they fell above or below the median of the entire 412 growth districts in respect to total average daily attendance, percentage of increase in average daily attendance, and assessed valuation per pupil. The findings are summarized below: 1. A clear-cut division was indicated among the growth districts between short-term residents and long-term residents. At the extrem es, sixteen districts reported that 61 to 100 per cent of their population had lived in the district three years or less, while forty-four districts reported that 61 to 100 per cent of their residents had lived in the district ten years or more. One district reported that 80 to 100 per cent of its population were residents of three years or less; five districts reported that 80 to 100 per cent of their residents had resided in the district ten years or longer. In respect to the three growth classifications of districts it was found that: (a) As the percentage of residents who had lived in the district three years or less was in creased, the responding districts were identified more frequently as largest-grow th districts, m ore frequently as fastest-growth districts, and with little or no change in frequency as districts which had maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil between 1945 and 1962. (b) As the percentage or residents who had lived in the district ten years or more was in creased, the responding districts were identified less frequently as the largest- growth districts, less frequently as the fastest-growth districts, and more frequently 279 as the districts which had maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil between 1945 and 1962. Student Transiency in Growth School Districts Items 47 and 48 were designed to determine the degree of student transiency in growth school districts of California as a whole, and among the three growth classifications of districts. The dis tricts which had been selected for study were asked to estimate the annual rate of student turnover, and the percentage of new students who were enrolled each year from out-of-state, in their respective districts. One hundred eighty districts responded to this particular inquiry. The distribution of their responses appears opposite items 47 and 48 of Table 44. Analysis of the total responses A first analysis of the responses indicated a very broad range of student turnover among growth districts. Although two out of three districts reported that student turnover was between 10 to 29 per cent, at the extremes thirty-six districts reported less than 10 per cent student turnover, while twenty-two districts reported 280 more than 30 per cent student turnover. One district reported 81 to 100 per cent annual rate of student turnover. The enrollment of students directly from out-of-state was less than 10 per cent of the total enrollment in 114 districts, 10 to 29 per cent in sixty districts, 30 to 60 per cent in three districts, and 61 to 80 per cent of the total enrollment in three of the growth districts. Following the tabulation of the total responses, the responding districts were identified as above-median or below- median in accordance with their position when ranked with the original 412 growth school districts in the three classifications described in detail on page 216. Student transiency in growth school districts The problem was to determine whether there were any differing characteristics in the student turnover among the three classifications of growth districts. In item 47, the above-median responses were grouped into column A (36 responses), columns A and B (158 responses), columns B, C, D, and E (144 responses), and columns C, D, and E (22 responses). The above-median responses in each of the group ings were converted into percentages with the following results: 281 P ROP ORTION OF RESPONSES ___ 0 to 9 0 to 29 10 to 100 30 to 100 Classification__________P er Cent P er Cent P er Cent Per Cent I 50 51 51 50 II 50 49 50 59 in 53 49 49 55 In Classification I, from left to right, it was observed that changes in the rate of student turnover were not particularly identified with either the districts which were above-median or below- median in respect to attendance size. In Classification H, the proportion of fastest-growth districts displayed practically no change until the final column, when the highest percentage of student transiency was reported. In this column, the fastest-growth districts had a 9 per cent increase in their proportion of responses. In Classification III, student transiency was not p ar ticularly identified with the districts which maintained a favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil, although they had a slightly increased representation at the two extreme columns, where the lowest and highest percentages of student turnover were reported. Percentage of students enrolled directly from out-of-state In item 48, the above-median responses were grouped 282 into Column A (114 responses), columns A and B (174 responses), columns B, C, D, and E (63 responses), and columns C, D, and E (6 responses). The above-median responses in each of the groupings were converted into percentages with the following results: PROPORTION OF R E S P ONSES_ _ _ 0 to 9 0 to 29 10 to 100 30 to 100 Classification_________ P er Cent P er Cent P er Cent Per Cent I 43 47 60 83 II 43 49 65 83 HI 43 47 60 83 In Classification I, reading from left to right, it was observed that as the percentage of out-of-state enrollment was increased, the proportion of above-median growth districts in each of the three classifications increased and in approximately the same proportion. Summary of the analysis of items 47 and 48 Items 47 and 48 of the questionnaire were designed to determine the degree of student transiency in growth school districts in California The districts which had been selected for the study were asked to estimate their annual rate of student turnover and the per centage of new students who were enrolled each year from out-of- 283 state. The responses were tabulated in term s of totals, and also as to whether they fell above or below the median of the entire 412 growth districts in respect to total average daily attendance, p e r centage of increase in average daily attendance, and assessed valu ation per pupil. The findings are summarized below: 1. Two out of three districts reported that their annual rate of student turnover was between 10 to 29 per cent. At the extremes, thirty-six districts reported less than 10 per cent student turnover, and twenty-two districts reported more than 30 per cent annual rate of student turnover. One dis trict reported 81 to 100 per cent rate of turnover. 2, Nearly two out of three districts reported that less than 10 per cent of their annual new enroll ment was directly from out-of-state. At the extrem es, sixty districts reported 10 to 29 per cent out-of-state enrollment, three districts reported 30 to 60 per cent, and three districts reported 61 to 80 per cent of their new enroll ment each year was from out-of-state. In respect to the three growth classifications which had been established, it was found that: (a) As the percentage of annual student turn over was increased, the reporting districts were identified no m ore and no less fre quently as the largest-grow th districts, and slightly m ore frequently as the fastest- growth districts and as the districts which had maintained the most favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil between 1945 and 1962, (b) As the percentage of out-of-state enroll ment was increased, the reporting districts were identified with increasing frequency in each classification of growth district. I te i 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 T A B L E 44 EXTREM E D IFFER E N C ES AMONG GROWTH SCHOOL DISTRICTS NUMBER DISTRICTS REPORTING Description A B C D E 0 to 9 10 to 29 30 to 60 61 to 80 81 to 100 Per Cent Per Cent Per Cent Per Cent Per Cent Dwelling units built before 1945 55 62 51 13 1 Dwelling units built 1945 to 1955 23 83 63 12 2 Dwelling units built 1956 to 1962 18 56 65 29 15 Residents in single-dwelling units 2 2 14 58 107 Residents in apartment units 115 56 9 1 2 Residents renting or leasing 56 65 54 7 1 Residents in 1, 500 plus square feet 36 77 41 20 8 Residents in 1, 000 minus square feet 35 57 44 32 14 Residents in substandard units 134 39 9 0 0 Residents in industrial areas 143 35 4 0 0 Workers frequently unemployed 63 76 33 10 1 Females working full time 14 97 68 4 0 285 TABL^-. 4 4 — •Continued NUMBER DISTRICTS REPORTING Item Description A 0 to 9 Per Cent B 10 to 29 Per Cent C 30 to 60 Per Cent D 61 to 80 Per Cent E 81 to 100 Per Cent 37 Family income $10, 000 plus per year 50 86 38 10 1 38 Family income $6, 000 minus per year 22 56 63 30 14 39 Adults with university training 52 85 34 11 1 40 Adults with trade-tech training 15 60 88 18 2 41 Adults with no special training 44 67 43 23 6 42 Negro residents in population 172 8 2 1 1 43 Bilingual residents 109 54 17 6 0 44 Residents age fifty or over 26 100 55 2 0 45 Residents in district three years or less 11 98 58 15 1 46 Residents in district ten years or more 17 58 64 39 5 47 Annual student turnover rate 36 122 19 2 1 48 Students enrolling from out-of-state 114 60 3 3 0 287 T A B L E 45 ID E N T IF Y IN G F E A T U R E S O F TH E F A S T E S T -G R O W T H D IST R IC T S P er Cent Per Cent _ _ 1 n Z Dev Dev Most frequently identified with a high percentage of: College trained residents in work force 39 24 Family income of $10, 000 per year 30 18 Residential construction between 1956 and 1962 +22 8 Single-dwelling unit occupancy 17 10 Three years or less residency in district 15 9 Residential units of 1, 500 square feet 8 3 Student transiency 4 9 Identified between other two classifications in respect to: Workers with a trade-tech background 2 -4 Bilingual residents -22 +4 T A B L E 4 5 --C o n tin u e d 288 P er Cent P er Cent _ 1 Dev _ 2 Dev Least frequently identified with a high percentage of: Residential units of 1, 000 square feet -8 -2 Family income of $6,000 or less per year -12 -1 Recurring layoffs or seasonal employment -16 -4 Working residents with no academic training -17 -1 Apartment house occupancy -19 -17 Mixed residential and commercial areas -25 -23 Residents who are renting or leasing — 26 -4 Residents in substandard residencies -27 -14 Residents of ten or more y e a rs1 duration -34 -11 Residents age fifty or over -42 -14 Residential construction prior to 1945 -55 -26 Refers to percentage differences between fastest-growth dis tricts and districts which retained assessable wealth per pupil. 2 Refers to percentage difference between fastest-growth dis tricts and largest growth districts. 289 T A B L E 46 ID E N T IF Y IN G F E A T U R E S O F T H E L A R G E ST -G R O W T H D IST R IC T S P er Cent P er Cent 1 2 Dev Dev Most frequently identified with a high percentage of: Workers with a trade-tech background Identified between other two classifications in respect to: College trained residents in work force 15 -24 Residential construction between 1956 and 1962 14 -8 Family income of $10, 000 per year 12 -18 Single-dwelling unit occupancy 7 -10 Three years or less of residency in district 6 -9 Residential units of 1, 500 square feet 5 -3 Apartment house occupancy -2 17 Mixed residential and comm ercial areas -2 23 Residential units of 1, 000 square feet or less -6 2 Family income of $6,000 or less per year -11 290 T A B L E 4 6 --C o n tin u e d P er Cent P er Cent ^ 1 2 Dev Dev Recurring layoffs or seasonal employ ment -12 4 Residents in substandard residencies -13 14 Working residents with no academic training -16 1 Residential construction prior to 1945 o ( M 1 19 Residents who are renting or leasing -22 4 Residents of ten or more y e a rs’ duration -23 11 Residents age fifty and over -28 + 14 Least frequently identified with a high percentage of: Bilingual residents — 26 -4 Student transiency -5 -9 Refers to percentage difference between largest-grow th dis tricts and districts which retained their assessable wealth per pupil. 2 Refers to percentage difference between largest-grow th dis tricts and fastest-growth districts. 291 T A B L E 47 IDENTIFYING FEATURES OF THE DISTRICTS WHICH MAINTAINED A FAVORABLE RATIO OF ASSESSED VALUATION PER PUPIL Per Cent Per Cent l _ 2 Dev Dev Most frequently identified with a high percentage of: Residential construction prior to 1945 +55 +39 Residents age fifty and over +42 +28 Residents of ten or more years* duration +34 +23 Residents in substandard residencies 27 13 Bilingual residents 22 26 Residents who are renting or leasing 26 22 Mixed residential and commercial areas 25 2 Apartment house occupancy 19 2 Residents with no academic training 17 16 Recurring layoffs or seasonal employment 16 12 Family income of $6,000 or less per year 12 11 Residential units of 1, 000 square feet 8 6 Identified between other two classifications in respect to: Student transciency -4 5 292 T A B L E 4 7 --C o n tin u e d P e r Cent P er Cent _ 1 Dev _ 2 Dev Least frequently identified with a high percentage of: Workers with a trade-tech background -6 Residential units of 1, 500 square feet -8 -5 Three years or less residency in district -15 -6 Single-dwelling unit occupancy -17 7 Residential construction between 1956 and 1962 -22 -14 Family income of $10, 000 per year -30 -12 College trained residents in work force -39 -15 Refers to percentage difference between districts which main tained a favorable ratio of assessable wealth per pupil and fastest- growth districts. 2 Refers to percentage difference between districts which main tained assessed wealth per pupil and the largest-grow th districts. C H A P T E R X V SUMMARY OF PART IV Introduction The purpose of P art IV of this study was to investigate the phenomenon of growth in California during the fifteen-year period following the end of World War II, and to examine social changes coincident with that growth. The specific object of the investigation was to determine an answer to the following question: Does the appearance or absence of specific social factors coincide with upward or downward trends in assessed valuation per pupil in average daily attendance? Findings from the Literature An intensive reading was conducted of the professional literature and research related to the purpose of the study. Three areas of growth were analyzed in detail: (1) migration, (2) employ ment trends, and (3) urban growth. 293 29 4 Migration During the study years, 1945 to 1961, California was one of four states in which migration was the leading factor in population increase. The annual rate of migration into California was found to have exceeded the annual birth rate in each decade since 1850. Internal migration was found to be a second characteristic of m igratory growth in California. The movement of people between counties and metropolitan areas was noticeably above the national average of reported population movement. Since the early nineteen hundreds, the direction of both external and internal migration has been increasingly toward Southern California as compared with other regions of the state. Employment and industry Between 1945 and 1961 the numbers of people employed in the industries of California increased annually, although within specific industries, the peak years of employment were attained between 1955 and 1958. In their proportion of the total labor force, the agricul ture industry declined 4 per cent during the study years, while services and finance each registered a 2 per cent gain. In the manufacturing industry certain activities such as 295 aircraft, motor vehicles and equipment, lumber and wood products, and fish canning and preserving decreased in the number of people employed, while others, particularly electrical and other kinds of machinery increased in numbers of people employed. Technological advances, m ore efficient utilization of manpower and the relocation of plants were frequently mentioned as the causes of decreasing employment. Urban growth The trend of population movement toward urban centers at the expense of rural areas was traced to the latter part of the nineteenth century. During the first three decades of the twentieth century, urban growth was concentrated within a handful of the cities of California. Between 1945 and 1961, the growth of cities tended to lag behind the growth and development of outlying areas adjacent to the cities. Coincident with the rapid growth of suburban areas was a beginning of concentration upon the concept of metropolitan area development as encompassing the interrelated needs of both city and county areas. The findings of the Governor's Commission on m etro politan problems were described, as was the investigation of the 296 Assembly Interim Subcommittee on metropolitan area development. Finally, the impact of urbanization upon the school dis tricts of California as recognized by the administrative leaders of those districts was reported. Findings from the Questionnaire In general, the growth school districts reflected the dynamic aspects of population increase in California during the years 1945 to 1961. In certain of the growth districts extreme examples of imbalances in the composition or characteristics of the population were found coincident with the study years. The increase in student population between 1945 and 1961 was found to be closely interrelated with an unprecedented volume of single-dwelling construction in the same period. In at least one of the growth districts, however, over 80 per cent of the residential construction had been completed prior to 1945; and in at least two districts, over 80 per cent of the re s i dential population was found living in apartment-type dwellings. Results of the investigation In respect to the question, "Does the appearance or absence of specific sociological factors coincide with upward or 297 downward trends in assessed valuation per pupil in average daily attendance?" an affirmative answer was found in those instances where the specific factor was present or absent to an extreme degree relative to the presence or absence of the same factor in all other growth districts. When the following specific factors were found in a pro portion of 10 per cent or m ore, they tended to coincide most fre quently with upward trends in assessed valuation per pupil: (1) r e s i dents in apartment-type dwellings; (2) residents in substandard housing; and (3) residents living in industrialized or commercialized neighborhoods. When the following specific factors were found in a pro portion of 30 per cent or m ore, they tended to coincide most fre quently with upward trends in assessed valuation per pupil: (1) re s i dential construction prior to 1945; (2) residents renting or leasing; (3) residents subject to recurring layoffs or seasonal employment; (4) residents earning six thousand dollars per year or less; (5) work ing residents with no special academic training; (6) bilingual re s i dents; (7) residents age fifty or over; and (8) residents in the district ten years or more. When the following specific factors were found in a pro portion of less than 10 per cent, they tended to coincide with down 298 ward trends in assessed valuation per pupil: (1) apartment house occupancy; (2) residents renting or leasing; (3) residents occupying 1,000 square feet or less; (4) families earning $6,000 or less per year; (5) residents age fifty or over; and (6) residents in the district ten years or more. When the following specific factors were found in a pro portion of 30 per cent or m ore, they tended to coincide most fre quently with downward trends in assessed valuation per pupil: (1) dwelling units of 1, 500 square feet or more; (2) families earning $10,000 per year or more, and (3) working residents with a college or university background. When the factor of single-dwelling unit construction was found in a proportion of 80 per cent or less of all residential con struction, it tended to coincide most frequently with an upward trend in assessed valuation per pupil. When the factor of single-dwelling unit construction was found in a proportion of 81 per cent or m ore of all residential con struction, it tended to coincide most frequently with a downward trend in assessed valuation per pupil. Finally, it was found that the factors which tended to coincide with downward trends in assessed valuation were frequently identified with those districts which experienced the greatest p er centage gains in student population during the fifteen-year study period. P A R T Y SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS CHAPTER XVI SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Introduction In this final part of the study, the findings of P arts II, III, and IV are sum m arized and serve as the basis for the conclusions and recommendations resulting from the combined investigations. It is considered appropriate at this point to review briefly the motiva tion, the purpose, and procedures which guided the conduct of this fifteen-month study. The study was motivated by the common interest of the researchers in certain aspects of the phenomenon of growth in stu«— dent population in the school districts of California between 1945 and 1961. Each researcher was concerned less with the quantitative aspects of growth than with the basic social and economic changes which were a consequence of this growth and their effects upon the traditional and legal pattern of financing the public schools of California. The magnitude of the study was recognized by Dr. D. Lloyd Nelson, Professor of School Administration at the University 301 302 of Southern California, who proposed that the investigators form a research team and conduct a joint study of the problem. It was agreed that each researcher should conduct his own phase of the study independently of the others, imposing upon himself the ethical conduct required of a scientific investigation, and pursuing a jointly-determined outline of procedural methods. It was also agreed that each member of the research team should have full knowledge of, and accept full responsibility for the entire study as finally completed. The completed study is unique in that it is the only one of its kind, an objective effort to analyze in detail the effects of growth upon the financial ability of school districts, during the period of the m ost phenomenal growth yet experienced in the history of California public education. In the process of the investigation, every school district in California was retraced through the organizational and boundary changes that had occurred subsequent to the starting date of the investigation, 1945. The statistical information which was gathered on each of these districts was coded and key punched on data process ing cards for permanent reference and future research. In utilizing the innumerable combinations which were conducted with the data processing cards, the scores of interviews which were held with 303 adm inistrators in the field, the results gleaned from the question naire and the books, articles, and pamphlets which were read, the researchers strove to eliminate any findings which could not be fully substantiated. The researchers anticipate that to some the findings which resulted from the study will appear obvious. They hope that to others the findings will provide additional insights and a fram e work for further educational planning and research. Procedures and Findings: P art II Procedure utilized in P art II P art II of the investigation was concerned with the finan cial factors of growth, with specific reference to the changes in wealth per pupil which had occurred in California school districts during the period selected for study. In order to proceed with this phase of the investigation it was found necessary to gather and compile growth and wealth data on every school district in California for the years 1945 to 1961. The basic statistical data were obtained from each of the fifty-eight county school offices in the state. Following the collection and v eri fication of the original data, the essential information was key punched for data processing. 304 Once this task was completed, there existed for the first time a means of analyzing and comparing with dependable accuracy the changes in assessed valuation, assessed valuation per pupil, and changes in average daily attendance which had transpired in each of 1, 649 operating school districts in California during the years following the second world war. Furtherm ore, it was possible to make comparisons among districts by type of organization, by counties and by regional delim itations. Findings concerning growth 1. The number of pupils in average daily attendance in California elementary, high school, and unified districts during the fifteen-year study period increased from 1, 127, 392 in 1945 to 1946 to 3, 370,809 in I960 to 1961. This was state-wide increase of 199 per cent. 2. Growth in student population was identified as predominantly oriented around five geographic regions. The South Coastal area absorbed 51 per cent of the total growth, while 19 per cent of the growth was identifiable with the San Francisco Bay area. The Central Valley area accounted for 11 per cent of the growth, while the North Coastal and North Mountain areas each accounted for slightly less than 1 per cent of the total student population increase. The intensive concentration of student population growth was further exemplified by the finding that fifteen counties contained 86 per cent of the average daily attendance in the state during the fiscal year 1960- 61 . When the fifteen-year period was divided into three sub-periods it was found that growth was an ac celerating phenomenon. The five-year period, 1945-46 to 1950-51, accounted for 26 per cent of the total growth; the five-year period, 1950-51 to 1955-56 accounted for 31 per cent of the total growth; while the period 1955-56 to 1960-61 accounted for 43 per cent of the growth which occurred during the entire study period. When growth was analyzed in term s of district organization, it was found that 54 per cent of the growth occurred in elementary districts, 30 per cent in unified districts^ and the remaining 16 per cent was absorbed among the high school 306 d is t r ic t s o f th e s ta t e . 6. The 412 maximum-growth districts which were selected for detailed study, accounted for nearly 76 per cent of the total average daily attendance in the state, and their growth statistics during the period studies represented 83 per cent of the total state-wide growth in student population. Assessed valuation and wealth per pupil 1. During the fifteen-year study period, the total assessed valuation of all California school dis tricts increased at approximately the same rate as the pupil population. 2. The rate of increase in assessed valuation was less in unified districts than in either elementary or high school districts. 3. The ratio of assessed valuation per pupil in average daily attendance increased over the same period of time in all types of school districts. Elementary school districts experienced a 13 per cent increase; unified school districts a 16 per cent increase; and high school districts a 27 per 307 cent increase for the period. 4. On a county-wide basis, the assessed valuation in the fifteen counties which experienced the greatest gains in student population increased at nearly double the rate of the fifteen counties which experienced the least student population increase for the same period. However, five of the fifteen counties of most-growth declined in the ratio of assessed valuation per unit of average daily attendance during the period. 5. On a regional basis, elementary districts gained in total assessed valuation per pupil in all areas with the exception of the San Francisco Bay area. High school districts and unified districts gained in total assessed valuation per pupil in all areas except the Central Valley area. Relationship of growth to wealth change 1. When the relationship between growth and wealth was treated statistically among the 412 California school districts which were classified as growth districts it was found that (a) those growth districts which experienced minimum growth (100 to 200 per cent), during the fifteen-year period demonstrated a significant relationship between amount of growth and an increase in wealth; (b) in districts of moderate growth, no signifi cant correlations between growth and increase or decrease in wealth were evident; (c) among districts of extreme growth there existed the highest correlation between growth and decrease in wealth. When the growth districts were treated statistically in respect to the type of district organization the following correlations were found: (a) A correlation of . 57 between growth and decrease in wealth in elementary districts. (b) A correlation of . 63 between growth and decrease in wealth in unified school district. (c) A correlation of . 34 between growth and decrease in wealth in high school districts. 309 3. When the growth districts were grouped by- county, and treated statistically, much higher correlations were found between growth and decrease in wealth, regardless of type of district organization. 4. When the growth districts were grouped according to geographic regions and treated statistically, slightly higher correlations between growth and decrease in wealth were found in three of the regional areas, but in the North Mountain and Central Valley regions considerably lower correlations were found. Procedures and Findings: P art 111 Procedure utilized in P art III P art III of the investigation was concerned with seeking an answer to the following question: "Does the appearance or absence of specific economic factors coincide with upward or down ward trends on assessed valuation per pupil in average daily attend- anc e ? " The technique employed in this effort was twofold in nature, consisting of (1) an analysis of the literature and related 310 research apropos of the problem area, and (2) the construction of a questionnaire designed to obtain a statistical m easure of the presence or absence of given selected economic factors within the 412 growth districts studied. As an outgrowth of an intensive review of the literature coupled with the basic findings expressed in P art II of the study, the investigator selected to pursue the problem from the viewpoint of land-use changes in attempt to account for the variations in wealth per average daily attendance discerned in P a rt II of the study. Findings concerning specific economic factors During the period studied, 1945 to 1961, the growth districts treated in the study witnessed changes in assessed valuation per average daily attendance ranging from a -91.971 per cent decrease to a +333.693 per cent increase, thus displaying a wide differential in wealth per pupil among such districts. In accordance with the data realized from questionnaire returns and a statistical treatm ent thereof, as delineated in Chapter X, the relative effects of selected land-use changes on assessed val uation per average daily attendance may be expressed specific to the growth districts studied. In over-view, the evidence amassed con veys the relative importance of given land-use change categories on 311 the fiscal factor of increase or decrease in assessed valuation per average daily attendance. Land-use changes witnessed in way of transitions to (1) Multiple Family Residential, (2) Commercial, (3) Industrial, and (4) Public Utility, tended to produce the favorable fiscal condition of an increase in assessed valuation per average daily attendance. A land-use change to Single Family Residential, specifi cally Agriculture-Open Space to Single Family Residential, tended to create the unfavorable fiscal result of a decrease in assessed valu ation per average daily attendance. The findings obtained tended to suggest that as the growth districts studied might witness proportional future gains in the land- use change categories, "Multiple Family Residential, " "Com m ercial, 1 1 "Industrial," and "Public U tility," they would accrue in all probability a proportional increase in assessed valuation per average daily attendance. In contrast, as these same growth dis tricts might realize a proportional increase in the land-use change category, "To Single Family Residential, " subsequent to the study years 1945 to 1961 encompassed in this study, a reverse fiscal effect might reasonably be expected. Finally, the fiscal effect of the various land-use change categories treated in this study may be viewed only on the bases of 312 relative and probable fiscal effect, the statistical results obtained not being amenable unequivocally to a structured "land-use model" for predictive purposes. Procedures and Findings; P art IV Procedure utilized in P art IV The specific object of this part of the investigation was to determine an answer to the following question: "Does the appearance or absence of specific sociological factors coincide with upward or downward trends in assessed valuation per pupil in average daily attendance ?" A two-pronged procedure was developed for this under taking, which consisted (1) of an intensive review of the literature and research related to the problem, and (2) the development of a questionnaire which was designed to m easure the degree of presence of a group of selected social factors in the 412 school districts which had been identified as growth districts. Findings concerning migration During the study years, 1945 to 1961, California was one of four states in which migration was the leading factor in population increase. The annual rate of migration into California was found to 313 have exceeded the annual birth rate in each decade since 1850. Internal migration was found to be a second characteristic of migratory growth in California. The movement of people between counties and metropolitan areas was noticeably above the national average of reported population movement. Since the early nineteen hundreds, the direction of both external and internal migration has been increasingly toward Southern California as compared with other regions of the state. Employment and industry Between 1945 and 1961 the numbers of people employed in the industries of California increased annually, although within specific industries, the peak years of employment were attained between 1955 and 1958. In their proportion of the total labor force, the agri cultural industry declined 4 per cent during the study years, while services and finance each registered a 2 per cent gain. In the manufacturing industry certain activities such as aircraft, motor vehicles and equipment, lumber and wood products, and fish canning and preserving decreased in the number of people employed, while others, particularly electrical and other kinds of machinery increased in numbers of people employed. 314 Technological advances, more efficient utilization of manpower, and the relocation of plants were frequently mentioned as the causes of decreasing employment. Urban growth The trend of population movement toward urban centers at the expense of rural areas was traced to the latter part of the nineteenth century. During the first three decades of the twentieth century, urban growth was concentrated within a handful of the cities of California. Between 1945 and 1961, the growth of cities tended to lag behind the growth and development of outlying areas adjacent to the cities. Coincident with the rapid growth of suburban areas was a beginning of concentration upon the concept of metropolitan area development as encompassing the interrelated needs of both city and country areas. The findings of the Governor's Commission on m etro politan problems were reported as well as the investigations of a series of legislative interim committees into specific aspects of metropolitan area problems. i Finally, the impact of urbanization upon certain school districts of California as recognized by the administrative leaders of those districts was reported. 315 F in d in g s fr o m th e q u e stio n n a ir e In respect to the question, "Does the appearance or absence of specific social factors coincide with upward or downward trends in assessed valuation per pupil in average daily attendance?" an affirmative answer was found in those instances where the specific factor was present or absent to an extreme degree relative to the presence or absence of the same factor in all other growth districts. When the following specific factors were found in a pro portion of 10 per cent or more, they tended to coincide most fre quently with upward trends in assessed valuation per pupil: (a) re s i dents in apartment-type dwellings; (2) residents in substandard housing; and (3) residents living in industrialized or commercialized neighborhoods. When the following specific factors were found in a pro portion of 30 per cent or m ore, they tended to coincide most fre quently with upward trends in assessed valuation per pupil: (1) re s i dential construction prior to 1945; (2) residents renting or leasing; (3) residents subject to recurring layoffs or seasonal employment; (4) residents earning $6, 000 or less per year; (5) working residents with no special academic training; (6) bilingual residents; (7) re s i dents age fifty or over; and (8) residents in the district ten years or m ore. 316 When the following specific factors were found in a proportion of less than 10 per cent, they tended to coincide with downward trends in assessed valuation per pupil: (1) apartment house occupancy; (2) residents renting or leasing; (3) residents occupying 1, 000 square feet or less; (4) families earning $6, 000 or less per year; (5) residents age fifty or over; and (6) residents in the district ten years or m ore. When the following specific factors were found in a pro portion of 30 per cent or more, they tended to coincide most fre quently with downward trends in assessed valuation per pupil: (1) dwelling units of 1,500 square feet or more; (2) families earning $10, 000 or more per year; and (3) working residents with a college or university background. When the factor of single-dwelling unit construction was found in a proportion of 80 per cent or less of all residential con struction, it tended to coincide m ost frequently with an upward trend in assessed valuation per pupil. When the factor of single-dwelling unit construction was found in a proportion of 81 per cent or more of all residential con struction it tended to coincide most frequently with a downward trend in assessed valuation per pupil. Finally, it was found that the factors which tended to coincide with downward trends in assessed valuation were frequently- identified with those districts which experienced the greatest p e r centage gains in student population during the fifteen-year study period. C H A P T E R XVII SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Introduction The conclusions and recommendations which are p re sented were derived from the findings of all three parts of this investigation. They are specifically related to the third question which was voiced at the beginning of the study: "Is there evidence that the presence of certain combined socio-economic factors co incide with a trend of upward or downward assessed valuation per pupil in average daily attendance?" Since the conclusions were derived from findings which were appropriate to the era, 1945 to 1961, their aptness for predic tive purposes is necessarily predicated upon the continuance of dominant trends which were operative during the study period. Conclusions Among the districts which were studied and within the study period, it was concluded that: 318 Rate of growth in student population was a most significant factor coincident with upward or down ward trends in the computation of assessed valu ation per pupil. Among the school districts studied which experienced a minimum rate of growth (100 per cent to 200 per cent over the fifteen-year period) there was a significant correlation between growth and increase in assessed valuation per pupil. Contrarily, among the districts which experienced a maximum rate of growth (500 per cent to 5, 000 per cent over the fifteen-year period) there was a significant correlation between growth and decrease in assessed valuation per pupil. Land utilization was a significant factor coincident with upward or downward trends in the computation of assessed valuation per pupil. School districts which underwent a rapid transition from open land to residential occupancy during the study period tended to experience the most severe decline in assessed valuation per pupil. Similarly, districts, in which the majority of residential construction was single-dwelling unit construction completed during and particularly in the latter part of the fifteen-year study period, exhibited a severe decline in assessed valuation per pupil. Land utilization exerted a regulatory effect upon the rate of growth within school districts. Those school districts whose land was utilized prim arily for single-dwelling unit residential housing ex hibited the most accelerated rate of growth during the study period; whereas districts with diverse utilization of land exhibited a more moderate rate of student population growth. Longevity of growth was a factor coincident with upward or downward trends in assessed valuation per pupil. Those districts in the study which had experienced a substantial portion of their re s i dential and industrial development prior to the fifteen-year study period enjoyed a m ore favorable ratio of assessed valuation per pupil than those districts whose residential and other construction was heaviest during the study period. The average age of the residential population (child and adult) was a factor coincident with upward or downward trends in assessed valua tion per pupil. D istricts in which the average age of residents was thirty-five years or younger were frequently identified as districts which had experienced a decline in assessed valuation per pupil; whereas districts in which the average age of residents was above thirty-five years were frequently identified as districts which had ex perienced an increase in assessed valuation per pupil during the study period. A growing physical gap between the newer re s i dential areas and the centers of commerce and industry was determining not only the financial ability of school districts but also the social composition of the residential population of school districts. This conclusion accounts for the findings which indicate that districts which severely declined in assessed valuation per pupil display social characteristics of one extreme; whereas districts which increased in assessed valuation per pupil display social characteristics of a nearly opposite extreme. Urbanization is a factor which coincided with upward and downward trends both in respect to growth and assessed valuation. During the study period the most phenomenal gains in student population and in assessed valuation occurred in or adjacent to metropolitan areas. The most marked gains in assessed valuation, however, occurred in the urban centers, whereas the most marked gains in student population occurred in suburban areas. The same or very sim ilar conditions of growth will continue to become more generally evident during the subsequent fifteen-year period, I960 to 1975. Some evidence was found to indicate the probability of a renewed upsurge of enrollment affecting school districts situated in the more settled urban areas as older single dwelling units give way to multiple units, high rise apartments, and urban renewal developments. It is anticipated, however, that this upsurge, if it 323 takes place, will be in addition to the continued outward expansion of residential, commercial, and industrial development, particularly north and south along the coastal regions. 9. Local school districts exerted little or no control over their social and economic development. This study has demonstrated that social and economic forces of an area-wide, state-wide, and nation wide significance combine to create conditions which result in wealthy districts and poor dis tricts, moderate-growth districts, and phenomenal growth districts. 10. It is finally concluded, that during the period 1945 to 1961, there was firm evidence of a growing gap between areas of growth and areas of wealth in respect to California school districts. This gap was reflected by the increasing differences between school districts in their financial ability to support an educational program as m easured by the changes in assessed valuation per pupil. It was also r e flected by the increasing differences between school districts in respect to the social characteristics of 324 the local population. Diminishing returns from property taxation were indicated not only in districts of maximum growth, but on a county - wide basis in counties of maximum growth, as well as regionally, in regional areas of maximum growth. Presum ably, in the ensuing years, c e r tain districts will improve their ratio of assessed valuation per pupil either from modification of their growth rate or extensive changes in land utilization. At the same time, other districts which commence, maintain or renew an ac celerated growth rate will find the property tax to be a continuously shrinking source of income. R ecommendations Use of this study Since this study was concerned with general socio economic trends and growth patterns rather than with the treatm ent of any specific districts, it is recommended that the procedures which were developed for the study and the information which was produced by the study be utilized by local school administrators and their governing boards for the following purposes: 325 1. To fam iliarize themselves with the generalized concepts of growth and wealth which were the object of this study and which are acutely relevant to developing and financing a successful school program . 2. To develop a perspective of the status of their own district in relationship to the social and economic characteristics which were described in the study. 3. To plan objective methods of determining the historical and emerging characteristics within the district and of keeping abreast of them for the systematic development of the educational program . During the course of this investigation a handful of districts were found to be engaging in some phase of this kind of activity. A five-year enrollment survey, reviewable annually, was district policy in a few districts. Surveys of the nature should be broad enough in scope to detect social or economic changes in the life of the community which may affect educational planning and programming. In another district, a land-use inventory had been 326 completed and was being utilized by the governing board to predict the financial consequences to the district of certain contemplated changes in local zoning regulations. In yet another district, the school administration had joined with the city administration in financing a socio-economic inventory of the entire community to determine its needs and the real or potential resources which were available to finance those needs. On the other hand it was found that among a number of the districts which contributed to this study there was little accurate knowledge of the social and economic characteristics of their com munities. Very few districts maintained running control data of changes in the rate of growth, student turnover, dropout, origin or other characteristics of the student population which have direct implication for maintaining an educational program that is sensitive to community needs and expectations. Property taxation The findings of this study indicated that despite wide variations in local assessm ent practices, assessed valuation increased at approximately the same rate as pupil population during the fifteen-year study period when the state was treated as a single unit. Between local districts, however, and between groupings of 327 districts as county-wide units, or even as regional units, the areas of student population growth have tended to decrease in assessed valuation per pupil. In order to counteract the growing gap between areas of growth and areas of wealth, it is recommended that the concept of the local property tax be re-examined, and augmented by taxation of other forms of wealth. Problem s of urbanization Throughout the investigation strong indications were found that social and economic forces were emerging as area-wide problems which exert profound consequences upon individual school districts, particularly those districts located in or adjacent to the metropolitan areas of California. The area-wide nature of these problems place them beyond the ability of the individual school district to control or even, perhaps, to fully comprehend, yet they have a direct bearing on the financing, operation, and local autonomy of these districts. It is recommended that school districts located within metropolitan areas exert leadership in forming voluntary associa tions to engage in cooperative research relating to the educational implications and solutions of problems where a common interest is recognized. 328 Such an association would give school districts a voice in the discussions of federal-state-local or state-local policies in respect to contemplated or existing program s which have side- effects for local school district operations. The cooperative approach to common problems by local public agencies of sim ilar function is already in operation among other types of governmental agencies in California and has been conspicuously successful for these agencies. Such a cooperative association or study group would conceivably exist for the following purposes: 1. To keep member districts informed of state- or area-wide planning which would ultimately affect local school district administrative planning and program s. 2. To collect data of common interest to member districts which would serve to implement administrative recommendations. 3. To disseminate public information concerning the educational implications of area-wide proposals. 4. To develop long-range policies and recommenda tions in concert without endangering the concept 329 of local control. Administrative preparation Finally, it is recommended that opportunities for both present and future school adm inistrators to participate in continuous study program s and research into the nature and characteristics of urbanization as it affects the educational, social, and economic life of communities be encouraged and made available at the university level. BIBLIOGRAPHY B o o k s Anderson, William H. Taxation and the American Economy. New Jersey: Prentice-H all, Inc., 1954. Allen, Edward D. , and O. H. Brownlee. Economics of Public Finance. New York: Prentice-H all, Inc., 1947. Bogue, Donald J. (ed. ). Needed Urban and Metropolitan Research. Chicago: Population Research and Training Center, University of Chicago, 1953. Bonbright, Jam es C. Valuation of Property. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1937. Claremont Social Research Center. California Local Finance. Claremont, California: Claremont Social Research Center, The Associated Colleges. Stanford: Stanford University P re ss, I960. Gonant, Jam es B. Slums and Suburbs. New York: McGraw- Hill Book Company, 1961. Douglass, H. P. The Suburban Trend. New York: Century Company, 1925. Fortune Magazine (eds.). The Exploding Metropolis. New York: Doubleday and Company, 1958. G arrett, Henry E . , and R. S. Woodworth. Statistics in Psychology and Education. New York: Longmans, Green, and Company, 1961. Groves, Harold M. Viewpoints on Public Finance. New York: Henry Hold and Company, 1948, Hallenbeck, Wilbur C. American Urban Communities. New York: Harper and B rothers, 1951. 332 12. H arris, Seymour E. How Shall We Pay for Education? New York: Hooper and Brothers, 1948. 13. Hawley, Amos H. Human Ecology. New York; The Ronald P ress, 1950. 14. Jensen, Jens P. Property Taxation in the United States. Chicago: University of Chicago P ress, 1931. 15. ____________________ . Government Finance. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company, 1957. 16. Johns, Roe L ,, and Edgar L, Morphet. Financing the Public Schools. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1962. 17. Kendrick, M. Slade. Public Finance, Principles, and Problems. New York: Houghton-Mifflin Company, 1951. 18. Knapp, Robert B. Social Integration in Urban Communities. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, I960 19. Lonsdale, Richard C. The SchooPs Role in Metropolitan Area Development. Syracuse University P ress, I960. 20. Lynd, Robert S. and Helen M. Lynd. Middletown. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and Company, 1929. 21. . Middletown in Transition. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and Company, 1937. 22. Malthus, Thomas, Julian Huxley, and Frederick Osborn. Three Essays on Population., New York: The New American Library of World Literature, I960. 23. McKenzie, R. D. The Metropolitan Community. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1933. 24. Mumford, Lewis. The Culture of Cities. New York: Harcouit, Brace, and Company, 1938. 25. Myrdal, Gunnar. An American Dilemma. Volume I. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1944. 3 3 3 2 6 . 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. Shultz, W illiam J* , and C. Lowell H a rris s, A m erican Public Finance. New Je rse y : P ren tice-H all, In c ., 1954. Sakolski, Aaron M,. Land T enure and Land Taxation in A m erica. New York: R obert Schalkenbach Founcation, 1957. Sexton, P a tric ia C. Education and Incom e, New York: The Viking P re s s , 1961. Shevky, E shref, and M arilyn W illiams. The Social A reas of Los A ngeles. B erkeley: U niversity of C alifornia P re s s , 1949. Sweeney, Stephen B. (ed. ). M etropolitan A nalysis. Philadelphia: U niversity Pennsylvania P r e s s , 1958. Theodorson, George A. (ed. ). Studies in Human Ecology. New York: Row P eterso n and Company, 1961. W arren, Roland L. Studying Your Community. Connecticut: Case, Lockwood and B rainard, 1955. Publications of L earned Societies A m erican A ssociation of School A d m in istrato rs. Inservice Education for School A dm inistration. Washington, D. C. : The A ssociation, 1963. ________________________________________. Hints to the Beginning Superintendent of Schools. Washington, D. C .: The A ssociation, 1962. A m erican Institute of Real E state A p p raisers. Selected Readings in Real E state A ppraisal. A m erican Institute of Real E state A p p raisers, Publications Com m ittee. Indiana: Lakeside P r e s s , R. R. Donnelley and Sons Company, 1953. C alifornia T eachers A ssociation. The School Finance C risis. B urlingam e: California T eachers A ssociation, 1962. Commonwealth Club of California. The Population of California. San Francisco: P ark er Printing Company, 1946. Millbank Memorial Fund. Postwar Problems of Migration. New York: The Fund, 1947. _____________________________. Migration Since World War II. New York: The Fund, 1958. National Committee for Support of the Public Schools, Changing Demands on Education and Their Fiscal Implications. Washington, D. C .: The Association, 1962. National Education Association of the United States. Financing the Public Schools, 1960-1970. Washington, D. C .: The Association, 1962. Rockefeller Brothers Fund. The Pursuit of Excellence-** Education and the Future of Am erica. New York: Doubleday and Company, 1958. Publications of the Government Assembly Interim Committee Reports. Adapting Government to Metropolitan Needs, XIII, No. 11. Sacramento: California State Printing Office, 1957. ___________________________________________ . A Metropolitan Multi- Purpose D istrict for California, XIII, No. 24. Sacramento: California State Printing Office, 1959. . Multi ^Purpose Districts^ VI, No. 19. Sacramento: California State Printing Office, 1963. California State Board of Equalization* General Appraisal Manual. Division of A ssessm ent Standards. Sacramento: California State Printing Office, September, 1962.. . A ssessor's Handbook. Division of Assessm ent Standards. Sacramento: California State Printing Office, 1961. Economic Development Agency. California Statistical Abstract. Sacramento: California State Printing Office, 1961. Franklin, David. Compton: A Community in Transition. Los Angeles: Planning Council, Special Report No. 61, 1962. Governor's Budget. State of California Budget for the Fiscal Year 1963-64. Sacramento: California State Printing Office, 1963. Governor's Commission on Metropolitan Area Problem s. Meeting Metropolitan Problem s. Sacramento: California State Printing Office, I960, Munse, Albert R ., and Eugene P. McLoone. Public School Finance Program s of the United States, 1957-58. U. S. Office of Education, Miscellaneous Publication Number 33. Washington, D. C. : Government Printing Office, I960, Schmid, Calvin F . , Santo F. Camilleri, E arle H. MacCannell, Maurice D. Van Arsdol, J r. Methods of Differentiating Urban Social and Demographic A reas. U. S. Department of Commerce: Bureau offhe Census Working Paper No. 7, 1959. U. S. Bureau of the Budget. Standard Metropolitan Statistical A reas. Washington, D. C .: Government Printing Office, 1959. U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Prelim inary Estimates of the Components of Population Change by States. Washington, D. C ., The Bureau, 1961. U. S. Census of Population and Housing, I960, Los Angeles -Long Beach. Washington, D. C .: The Bureau, 1962. United States Department of Agriculture. Land. The Department Yearbook of Agriculture. Washington, D. C. Government Printing Office, 1958. Periodicals and Pamphlets Albert, Franklin E. "Zoring and Its Effect on Land Value, " The Residential A ppraiser, XXVIII (December, 1962), pp. 2-5. Campbell, E arl C. "Separation of Sources of State and Local Tax Revenue in California, " American Economic Review, XXVI (March, 1936), pp. 41-52. Cooper, Cinvent T. "Competition for the Tax Dollar, " Tax Digest, XLI, No. 1, F irst Quarter, 1963, pp. 20-22, 39. Davis, William M. "The Question of Value, " Right of Way, ILL, No. 5 (October, 1956), pp. 15-16. Dickenson, Robert E. The Metropolitan Regions of the United States. Geographical Review, XXIV, April, 1934. Duncan, Beverly, Georges Sabagh, Maurice Van Arsdol, J r. Patterns of City Growth. American Journal of Sociology, LXVII, No. 4, January, 1962. G lazier, William. Automation and Joblessness. Atlantic Monthly, August, 1962. Gronouski, John A. "State Supervision of Property Tax Administration, " National Tax Journal, X, No. 2 (June, 1957), pp. 158-170. Grumm, John G. Metropolitan Area Government: The Toronto Experience. Governmental Research Series No. 19, University of Kansas Publications, 1958. Hanson, Peter, M. A. I. "The Meaning of Value, " The Journal of the American Institute of Real Estate A ppraisers (July, 1953), pp. 289-297. McSweyn, Maxine. "Property Tax Levies Always Up, " Tax Digest, XLI, No. 2, Second Q uarter, 1963, pp. 45, 69-71. Musgrove, R. A ,, J. J. Carroll, L. D. Cook, L. Frane. "Distribution of Tax Payments by Income Groups, A Case Study for 1948, " National Tax Journal, IV, No. 1 March, 1951, pp. 1-53. National Education Association. "Interesting Facts and Figures on American Education, " National Education Association, XLI, No. 1 (February, 1963), pp. 3-9. Thorp, Claude R. "Property Tax Administration in Michigan, Institute of Public Administration, Pamphlet No. 22, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan P ress, 1951, 33. Van Arsdol, J r . , Maurice, Santo F. Camilleri, Calvin F. Schmid. The Generality of Urban Social Area Indexes. American Sociological Review, No. 23, June, 1958, pp. 271-280. Whyte, William H ., J r. The Transients. P arts 1-4, Fortune Magazine, May, June, July, August, 1953. Zimmer, Basil, Amos H. Hawley. Approaches to the Solution of Fringe Problem s. Public Administration Review, Fall, 1956. 338 Unpublished Documents 75. Beggs, Kenneth A, "Financing Public Education in California, Summary of Principal Findings." Stanford Research Study. Unpublished paper presented to the boards of education of participating California school districts, Los Angeles, March 6, 1961. 76. Cantrell, Lang Lewis. "Some Basic Modifications of American Taxation. " Unpublished Dissertation, School of Public Administration, University of Southern California, 1953. 77. Howell, Harry M. "A Study of A ssessm ent Practices in California as They Affect the Equalization Program in C alifornia.1 1 Unpublished Dissertation, School of Education, University of Southern California, 1950. 78. Inglewood Unified School D istrict. "Five-Y ear Enrollment Projection." Mimeographed report, February 25, 1963. 79. Los Angeles City Schools. "Some Problem s of Public Schools Finance Fund by the Los Angeles City School D istricts. " Mimeographed report, 1963. 80. Swanson, Jess Nelson. "Equalization of Property A ssess m ents." Unpublished Dissertation, School of Education, University of Southern California, 1961. Court Decisions 81. City of Los Angeles vs. Hughes, 202 Cal. 731. 82. Cleveland, C. C. and St. L. Ry. Co. vs. Backus, 154 U. S. 445 (1894). 83. De Luz Homes, Inc. vs. County of San Diego, 45 Cal. 2d 546. 339 84. M ississippi and B. R. R, Co, vs, Patterson, 98 U. S. 408, 85. Sacramento Southern R. Co. vs. Heibron, 156 Cal. 408. 86. Seaboard Airline Ry. Co. vs. Chamblin, 108 Va. 42; 60 S. E. 727. APPENDIXES APPENDIX A DISTRIBUTION OF GROWTH DISTRICTS BY COUNTY ELEM ENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICTS County Number Districts Number Growth Districts Number Districts Over 100 Per Cent Growth Number Districts Under 100 Per Cent Growth Alameda 25 12 18 7 Alpine 1 m 1 Amador 3 - 1 2 Butte 28 3 10 18 Calaveras 2 M - 2 Colusa 8 M 1 7 Contra Costa 23 8 12 11 Del Norte 5 1 5 m El Dorado 16 1 12 4 Fresno 69 5 23 46 Glenn 15 2 7 8 Humboldt 43 4 26 17 Imperial 20 2 4 16 Inyo 6 1 1 5 Kern 48 6 14 34 Kings 14 2 3 11 342 ELEM EN TA R Y SCHOOL D IST R IC T S--C ontinued County Number Districts Number Growth Districts Number Districts Over 100 Per Cent Growth Number Districts Under 100 Per Cent Growth Lake 7 - 4 3 Lassen 12 - 3 9 Los Angeles 62 45 56 6 Madera 21 1 6 15 Marin 24 8 15 9 Mariposa - - - - Mendocino 20 2 11 9 Merced 25 2 9 16 Modoc 12 3 9 Mono 5 - 3 2 Monterey 29 5 12 17 Napa 15 2 8 7 Nevada 14 - 4 10 Orange 28 19 25 3 Placer 22 3 16 6 ELEM ENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICTS— C ontinued County Number Districts Number Growth Districts Number Districts Over 100 Per Cent Growth Number Districts Under 100 Per Cent Growth Riverside 28 8 18 10 Sacramento 13 4 9 4 San Benito 21 1 5 16 San Bernardino 42 10 28 14 San Diego 36 16 29 7 San Francisco - - m - San Joaquin 60 4 23 37 San Luis Obispo 32 5 16 16 San Mateo 22 13 20 2 Santa Barbara 22 6 15 7 Santa Clara 36 20 30 6 Santa Cruz 16 5 11 5 Shasta 36 4 22 14 Sierra - - - - Siskiyou 33 1 13 20 ELEM ENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICTS— Continued County Number Districts Number Growth Districts Number Districts Over 100 Per Cent Growth Number Districts Under 100 Per Cent Growth Solano 16 3 7 9 Sonoma 49 6 30 19 Stanislaus 32 4 12 20 Sutter 22 1 9 13 Tehama 17 1 5 12 Trinity 15 - 10 5 Tulare 58 2 14 44 Tuolumne 19 m 8 11 Ventura 26 7 17 9 Yolo 23 2 7 16 Yuba 16 4 9 7 Total 1,312 261 679 633 HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICTS County Number Districts Number Growth Districts Number Districts Over 100 Per Cent Growth Number Districts Under 100 Per Cent Growth Alameda 4 3 4 - Alpine - m - m Amador 1 p * - 1 Butte 4 1 2 2 Calaveras 1 - - 1 Colusa 3 - - 3 Contra Costa 6 4 5 1 Del Norte 1 M 1 m El Dorado 1 1 1 - Fresno 14 1 8 6 Glenn 3 1 2 Humboldt 4 3 3 1 Imperial 5 1 3 2 Inyo 2 - 1 1 Kern 4 2 2 2 Kings 3 - 1 2 • * HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICTS— Continued County Number Districts Number Growth Districts Number Districts Over 100 Per Cent Growth Number Districts Under 100 Per Cent Growth Lake 4 m 2 2 Lassen 1 m - 1 Los Angeles 15 12 13 2 Madera 3 1 2 1 Marin 3 2 2 1 Mariposa - - - an Mendocino 6 1 3 3 Merced 5 1 4 1 Modoc 2 ** - 2 Mono 1 m 1 m Monterey 4 2 3 1 Napa 1 1 1 an Nevada 1 1 1 m Orange 9 7 9 m Placer 3 2 2 1 HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICTS— Continued County Number Districts Number Growth Districts Number Districts Over 100 Per Cent Growth Number Districts Under 100 Per Cent Growth Riverside 6 2 5 1 Sacramento 3 1 2 1 San Benito 1 - - 1 San Bernardino 7 6 6 1 San Diego 7 5 6 1 San Francisco m m m m m m San Joaquin 6 3 5 1 San Luis Obispo 6 2 4 2 San Mateo 5 3 5 - Santa Barbara 4 1 3 1 Santa Clara 8 6 8 - Santa Cruz 2 2 2 Shasta 2 1 2 - Sierra m - - Siskiyou 5 m m 5 HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICTS— C ontinued County Number Districts Number Growth Districts Number Districts Over 100 Per Cent Growth Number Districts Under 100 Per Cent Growth Solano 3 2 2 1 Sonoma 5 3 5 - Stanislaus 7 1 3 4 Sutter 4 1 2 2 T ehama 2 1 2 Trinity 1 m 1 - Tulare 8 3 3 5 Tuolumne 2 - 2 M Ventura 6 2 5 1 Yolo 5 1 3 2 Yuba 2 1 2 - Total 221 93 153 68 w n O UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTS Number Districts Number Number Districts Number Districts County Growth Districts Over 100 Per Cent Growth Under 100 Per Cent Growth Alameda 7 1 1 6 Alpine m - m m Amador 2 - - 2 Butte 2 m M 2 Calaveras 1 m - 1 Colusa 2 - 1 1 Contra Costa 3 3 3 - Del Norte m « a - m El Dorado 1 1 1 • » Fresno 3 2 3 • f t Glenn 1 m - 1 Humboldt 2 1 2 - Imperial 2 - M 2 Inyo 3 m 1 2 O J Kern 4 1 3 1 O U N IFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTS— C ontinued County Number Districts Number Growth Districts Number Districts Over 100 Per Cent Growth Number Districts Under 100 Per Cent Growth Kings m - - - Lake 1 r n m M 1 Lassen 2 - m 2 Los Angeles 24 19 19 5 Madera m - - M Marin 1 1 1 “ Mariposa 1 - m 1 Mendocino 2 1 2 ■ a Merced 1 - a s 1 Modoc m m m - Mono m m m - Monterey 2 2 2 m Napa 2 - - 2 Nevada m p * m u> Orange 3 3 3 Placer 1 1 UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTS— Continued Number Districts Number Number Districts Number Districts County Growth Over 100 Per Cent Under 100 Per Cent Districts Growth Growth Riverside 6 5 5 1 Sacramento 4 4 4 m San Benito - - - m San Bernardino 6 3 6 m San Diego 5 3 4 1 San Francisco 1 m - 1 San Joaquin 2 2 2 m San Luis Obispo 1 •* - 1 San Mateo 1 1 1 m Santa Barbara 1 m 1 m Santa Clara 2 2 2 m Santa Cruz 1 M 1 - Shasta 1 m 1 Sierra 1 m _ 1 Siskiyou - - - 352 t UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTS— C ontinued County Number Districts Number Growth Districts Number Districts Over 100 Per Cent Growth Number Districts Under 100 Per Cent Growth Solano 3 m 1 2 Sonoma 2 1 1 1 Stanislaus 1 m - 1 Sutter « * m - m T ehama 1 m 1 - Trinity m m m - Tulare 2 1 « • 2 Tuolumne • » e v - m V entura 1 1 1 m Yolo 1 • * 1 m Yuba « ■ - m - Total 116 58 74 42 C o C P C o TO TAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS Number Districts Number Number Districts Number Districts Per Cent of Total County Growth Over 100 Per Cent Under 100 Per Cent ADA in Growth Districts Growth Growth Districts Alameda 36 16 23 13 47.6 Alpine 1 m m 1 • * Amador 6 m 1 5 m Butte 34 4 12 22 49.8 Calaveras 4 - • » 4 « a Colusa 13 - 2 11 - Contra Costa 32 15 20 12 76.9 Del Norte 6 1 6 a t 44.7 El Dorado 18 3 14 4 60.2 Fresno 86 8 34 52 66.8 Glenn 19 2 8 11 53.5 Humboldt 49 8 31 18 66. 3 Imperial 27 3 7 20 38.5 Inyo 11 1 3 8 42.6 Kern 56 9 19 37 66.1 £ Kings 17 2 4 13 41.3 TO TAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS— C ontinued County Number Districts Number Growth Districts Number Districts Over 100 Per Cent Growth Number Districts Under 100 Per Cent Growth Per Cent of Total ADA in Growth Districts Lake 12 - 6 6 m Lassen 15 3 12 - Los Angeles 101 76 88 13 81. 3 Madera 24 2 8 16 53.1 Marin 28 11 18 10 88.2 Mariposa 1 m - 1 m Mendocino 28 4 16 12 68.2 Merced 31 3 13 18 50.3 Modoc 14 m V 3 11 m Mono 6 « • 4 2 • a Monterey 35 9 17 18 84.3 Napa 18 3 9 9 66. 8 Nevada 15 1 5 10 28.8 Orange 40 29 37 3 97.0 Placer 26 5 19 7 59.3 TO TAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS— Continued County Number Districts Number Growth Districts Number Districts Over 100 Per Cent Growth Number Districts Under 100 Per Cent Growth Per Cent of Total ADA in Growth Districts Riverside 40 15 28 12 85.5 Sacramento 20 9 15 5 96. 7 San Benito 22 1 5 17 37.5 San Bernardino 55 19 40 15 85. 3 San Diego 48 24 39 9 96.5 San Francisco 1 m M 1 m San Joaquin 68 9 30 38 80.9 San Luis Obispo 39 7 20 19 67.1 San Mateo 28 17 26 2 96.1 Santa Barbara 27 7 19 8 79.6 Santa Clara 46 28 40 6 96.6 Santa Cruz 19 7 14 5 78.1 Shasta 39 5 24 15 68.3 Sierra 1 - - 1 - Siskiyou 38 1 13 25 14.0 TO TAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS— Continued County Number Districts Number Growth Districts Number Districts Over 100 Per Cent Growth Number Districts Under 100 Per Cent Growth Per Cent of Total ADA in Growth Districts Solano 22 5 10 12 32.1 Sonoma 56 10 36 20 65. 6 Stanislaus 40 5 15 25 59.2 Sutter 26 2 11 15 47.4 Tehama 20 2 8 12 45. 0 T rinity 16 - 11 5 m Tulare 68 6 17 51 31.1 Tuolumne 21 w* 10 11 M Ventura 33 10 23 10 74.5 Yolo 29 3 11 18 39.7 Yuba 18 5 11 7 84.0 Total 1,649 412 906 743 75.7 O J U l -j A P P E N D IX B FIVE REGIONAL AREAS OF GROWTH 1945 TO 1961 3 5 9 4 APPENDIX C QUESTIONNAIRE i r i i SECTION I - EC O N O M IC FA CTO RS PART A - C H A N G E S IN U SE O F L A N D DIRECTIONS. In t h i s se ctio n , p lease s e le c t and check (</) th e ap p ro p riate column opposite each o f th e land-use change c ateg o ries d e lin eated below. Please base your responses on th e follow ing c o n sid eratio n s: ( l) account only f o r th e increase in assessed v alu a tio n experienced in your school d i s t r i c t during th e f if te e n year p erio d 1945-46 through 1960- 61; (2 ) since assessm ents are based on th e way land i s used, in sp ite of th e way i t i s zoned, p lease d isreg ard zoning and rep ly on th e b a s is o f changes th a t were made in th e use o f land; ( 3) th e t o t a l of your responses should reason ably account fo r 100$ o f th e in crease in your assessed v a lu a tio n —obviously two check marks of "over 2/ 3 " or fo u r check marks of '^between 1 /3 and 2/ 3 " would be in c o rre c t; and (4) p lease consider th a t f o r th e purposes of t h is q u estio n n aire, your d i s t r i c t boundaries in 1945-46 were id e n tic a l to th a t of 1960- 61. EXAMPIE. The Maude School D is tr ic t had an assessed v a lu a tio n o f $45 m illio n in 1945-46, and an assessed v alu atio n of $75 m illio n in 1960-6 1. The d i s t r i c t th e re fo re re a liz e d a $30 m illio n in crease in assessed v a lu a tio n . Assume th a t $22 m illio n o f th e in crease was due to a change in land-use from A griculture-O pen Space to In d u s tria l, $5 m illio n due to a change in land-use from A griculture-O pen space to M ultiple Family R e sid e n tia l, and $3 m illio n due to a change from A griculture-O pen Space to Public U tility . The in crease in assessed v a lu a tio n would be pro p erly re fle c te d by p lacin g check marks in th e columns "over 2/ 3 ", "under l / 3 ", "under 1/ 3 ", on the lin e s corresponding to th e land-use change c ateg o ries given. 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 12 13 Ik 15 1 6 17 1 8 19 20 21 22 23 2 U PIEASE PREVIEW TH E QUESTIONS OUTLINED B E L O W BEFO RE RESPONDING TO T H E M , LA N D-UEE C H A N C E CATEGORIES Proportion of Increase in Assessed V aluation None Less 1/3 Between 1/3 & 2/3 Over 2/3 AU Agri c u ltu re - Open space to Single Family R e sid en tial A griculture-O pen Space to M ultiple Family R esid en tial A griculture-O pen Space to Conmercial A griculture-O pen Space to In d u s tria l A griculture-O pen Space to P ublic U tility A griculture-O pen Space to R ecreation sin g le Family R esid en tial to M ultiple Family R esid en tial Single Family R e sid e n tia l to Conmercial. Single Family R e sid e n tia l to In d u s tria l M ultiple Family R e sid e n tia l to Conmercial M ultiple Family R e sid e n tia l to In d u s tria l Commercial to Single Family R e sid en tial Comnercial to M ultiple Family R esid en tial Conmercial to In d u s tria l in d u s tr ia l to Single Family R e sid en tial In d u s tr ia l to M ultiple Family R e sid en tial In d u s tria l to Commercial Other (P lease s p e c ify ): to P roportion of Land S t i l l in A griculture-O pen Space Use PART B - DEFINITION O F TH E E C O N O M Y DIRECTIONS. In t h is se ctio n , p lease se le c t and check ( / ) th e ap p ro p riate column opposite each of th e Economic O perations o u tlin e d below. C O L U M N A. Check th e most s ig n ific a n t Economic O perations c u rre n tly engaged in w ith in th e boundaries of your Bchool d i s t r i c t . C O L U M N B, Check th e most s ig n ific a n t Economic O perations, whether w ithin or o utside th e boundaries of your school d i s t r i c t , th a t provide employment fo r th e working re s id e n ts of your d i s t r i c t . EC O N O M IC DERATIONS C O L U M N A C O L U M N B Crops/M eat/Dairy Production, and/or D erivative O perations N atural Reserves, M in eral/F o rest/F ish , and/or D erivative O perations M anufacturing (Non-Defense R elated) C onm ercial/R etail Trade B u sin eB s/p ro fessio n al/F in an cial O perations C om m unication/U tility O perations T ran sp o rtatio n (A ir/S hip/T rain/T ruck), and/or D erivative O perations Am usem ent/Recreation/Service O perations/M otels/H otels M ilitary/G overnm ental O perations C onstruction O perations Other (PleaBe Specify): a * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * S3CTI0N I I - SOCIOLOGICAL FACTORS G R O W T H PATTERNS IN SC H O O L DISTRICTS (19^5-62) DIRECTIONS. P lease check ( J ) in th e ap p ro p riate columns th e percentage fig u re s asked fo r below. Although a considerable la titu d e has been provided w ithin each column, — — i J i . J k l t t W H W A l i r a w u t v + .n m « k p n e close an estim ate as tn e q u esn o n n aire aepenut* upuu juuu. ouj.ij.tj w v uuu. you are a b le . uu ■ I . V w • FACTORS ■ERCEIfTAGES SPAN OF DUELLING UNIT CONSTRUCTION 0-9 10-29 30-60 61-80 81-100 25 $ of a l l dw elling u n its b u i l t b efore 19^5 26 $ of a l l dw elling u n its b u i lt 19^5-55 27 $ o f a l l dw elling u n its b u i lt 1955-62 KIND AND OCCUPANCY OF DWELLING UNITS 28 $ of a l l re s id e n ts occupying sin g le dw elling u n its (one house, one lo t) 29 $ o f a l l re s id e n ts occupying apartm ent type dw ellings (U o r more u n its ) 30 of a l l re s id e n ts re n tin g or le a sin g 31 < f > of a l l re s id e n ts occupying 1500 or more square f e e t of liv in g space 32 < f > of a l l re s id e n ts occupying 1000 or le s s square f e e t of liv in g space 33 5 6 of a l l re s id e n ts occupying sub-standard u n its (run-down; tem porary; or w ithout f u l l f a c i l i t i e s ) 3^ o f a l l re s id e n ts liv in g in p a r tia lly commercialized or in d u s tria liz e d neighborhoods. 35 LABOR FORCE f , of working re s id e n ts who are su b ject to re c u rrin g la y o ffs, tr a n s fe r , seasonal work, e tc . 36 $ of female re s id e n ts who work fu ll-tim e 37 < f > of fa m ilie s earning $10,000 or more p e r year 38 if, o f fa m ilie s earning $6,000 or le s s per year FA CTO RS PERCEN TA G ES ED U CA TIO N A L STA TU S 0-9 10-29 30-60 61-R0 h i - 100 39 $ of a d u lts in occupations asso c iated with a co lleg e or u n iv e rs ity background Ho $ o f a d u lts in occupations a sso c ia te d w ith secondary or tra d e -te c h n ic a l tra in in g in of a d u lts in occupations demanding no sp e c ia l academic tra in in g C O N CEN TRA TIO N B Y G R O U PS $ of Negro re s id e n ts in population * * 3 $ of b i-lin g u a l re s id e n ts 1 * 1 * of re s id e n ts age 50 and above T U R N O V E R O F RESIDENTS 1 * 5 5 6 liv e d in d i s t r i c t 3 years or le s s 1 * 6 $ liv e d in d i s t r i c t 10 y ears or more STU D EN T POPULATION 1 * 7 $ > of student tu rn o v er (annual ra te ) 1 * 8 % o f stu d en ts achieving a t o r above grade le v e l *9 % o f stu d en ts who e n ro lle d in d i s t r i c t d ir e c tly from o u t-o f s ta te 50 # of u ltim ate student population b e liev e to be a tta in e d in 1962 51 52 .POPULATION PER A CRE 1 91 *5 (CIRCLE ONE): 2 1 * POPULATION PER A CRE 1962 (CIRCLE ONE): 2 1 * 6 8 6 8 10 10 1? 12 ll* 16 l h 16 53 Check any item s below which you are WILLING TO PREDICT w ill change th e growth p a tte rn of vmif K+.rlet w ith in the next fiv e y ears: your aibbi j L L ’ V * f 1 littJ.lt V i l V . u u « > » _________ v MULTIPLE DWELLING CONSTRUCTION FEDERAL URBAN RENEWAL HIGH R IS : (S IX STORIES UP) INCREASE W ATER SUPPLY OTHER: CHANGE IN ZONING OF UNDEVELOPED LAND CLEARING OLD AREAS FOR RE-BUILDING CHANGES IN ECONOMY OF THE AREA ANTI-SEGREGATION LEGISLATION Do y o u w is h a c o p y o f t h e r e s u l t s o f t h i s s tu d y ? Y es Q No APPENDIX D SPONSORING LETTER 363 C a l ifo r n ia A sso cia tio n o f P u blic S ch oo l B usiness O fficials PRISIDBNT JOSEPH F. FOGARTY San Francisco Unhtsd School District F irst Vice PufiscN T EDGAR C. EGLY Pasamna Citt Schools SSCOND VlCS P rQIBBNT JAMES CHOOS Mt. Diablo UNiriso School D ttn ic t Sbcsbtast GRACE D. BUSH Cobonam UNint* School D im ic t February 15, 1963 T r ia su n i t A. J. CHURCHMAN San Diboo Unitm# School District Dibsctobs JACK R. SADLER San Bkrnardino Citt School District ROBERTA. WEBBER F risno UNinao School District HAROLD M. NICHOLS Santa Ana U N irm School District ERNEST W. CARL P ast Pusiobnt Mt. San Antonio J b. Collicb Dear Superintendent: The attached questionnaire represents a vital portion of a study being under taken at the University of Southern California by Paul Avery, Earle Brewer and Charles Miller. In agreeing to co-sponsor the study, the executive officers of C A P S B O be lieve that the completed project, to be entitled Socio-Economic Character is tic s of Growth in California School D istricts, 19^5-62, will m ake an important contribution to state-wide planning for future school growth. W e have anticipated that you may not have the sta tistic a l data available for answering every item of information that is being requested. In such in stances, an "educated guess" from yourself, a member of your staff, or a community agency w ill be completely acceptable. Your willingness to supervise the completion and return of the question naire by March 1 5 , 1963 will be appreciated by a ll concerned. Sincerely, \ S. C. Joyner Business Manager Los Angeles City Schools Enclosures: (A) Questionnaire (B) Addressed stamped envelope

Linked assets