Legislative Update

Legislative Update Archives

CLICK ON THE ISSUE YOU WISH TO VIEW

ARCHIVE LIST

January - June 2003

June 20, 2003, June 6, 2003, May 23, 2003, May 9, 2003, April 24, 2003, April 11, 2003, March 28, 2003, March 14, 2003, March 7, 2003, February 28, 2003, February 24, 2003, February 14, 2003, February 3, 2003, January 17, 2003

Back to Legislative Update Main Page

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

June 20, 2003

CAPITOL NEWS

1. More tinkering with California’s Primary Election dates. Two bills, one by Senator Ross Johnson (R - Orange County) and the other by Assembly Member John Longville (D - Rialto), are wending their way through the state Legislature, with the intent of moving the California Primary back to June for all primary elections except the Presidential, which would remain in early March. The Johnson bill would take effect in 2008, and the Longville bill would take effect in 2004.

Both bills passed their house of origin by the June 6 deadline.

2. First Budget deadline passes--with no budget. Since neither the Assembly nor the Senate had been able to come up with a budget plan to close the $38 billion gap, and a conference committee was making no headway, both Houses delegated the responsibility to the Big Five (the leadership of both chambers and the Governor) to produce a plan. The Big Five rapidly became the Big Two--as the Senate President pro Tempore, John Burton, and the Senate Minority Leader, Jim Brulte--overpowered the negotiations. The two seasoned politicians, scheduled to be termed out of office 2004, bring a total of half a century of experience to the table (Burton, 36 years; Brulte, 14 years).

Both Burton and Brulte also represent the ideological foundation of their respective parties, with Burton the classical liberal denouncing any further or major cuts to social programs, and Brulte the traditional conservative decrying any tax increases. Both legislators at this point seem to be standing in blocks of cement, adding to the paralysis that has spread over the state Capitol. The Governor meanwhile is distracted by the Recall to remove him from office, which is gaining momentum owing to the infusion of funds ($600,000 so far) into the signature-gathering process by wealthy Congress Member Darrell Issa (R - San Diego).

The state will run out of cash by August and will be unable to pay its bills--including paying its employees, thousands of whose checks may drop to the federal minimum wage, and stop altogether for thousands of others. Not meeting the Constitutional deadlines of June 15 (by which the Legislature must pass the Budget to the Governor) or July 1 (by which the Governor must approve the Budget) is more the rule than the exception. In the last 25 years, the Budget has been approved by July 1 just 4 times. The longest period of time without a budget in place occurred last year, when 79 days passed before the Governor approved the document on September 2.

In the midst of this uncertainty, the Trustees of the California State University system will consider a student fee increase of 30% at its July 15-16 meeting. CSU campuses will also be asked to prepare contingency plans for implementing enrollment reductions in spring 2004 (since campuses have already enrolled students for the fall 2003 semester). Four CSU campuses--Chico, Fullerton, Long Beach and San Diego--have already moved to limit their enrollments, by imposing tougher standards for students arriving outside their immediate service areas.

CSU Chancellor Charles Reed may additionally eliminate approximately 700 positions systemwide, primarily by not filling vacant positions or by not rehiring temporary employees.

3. The Maverick Budget Plan. Showing both courage and leadership, Assembly Members Keith Richman (R - Northridge) and Joe Canciamilla (D - Contra Costa) announced a budget plan this week that calls for a temporary half-cent sales tax, acknowledges the rollback of the vehicle license fee to 1998 levels, establishes a 5% reserve and includes a spending cap based on population growth and inflation. To encourage employers to create jobs and stem the tide of companies leaving the state, the budget proposal would make permanent the manufacturers investment tax credit, and it also contains detailed proposals for workers’ compensation reform, for reducing energy costs, and for ending abusive commercial lawsuits.

The budget plan also includes significant program cuts--including a total of $1.24 billion from K-12 and higher education; $1.4 billion from health and human services; a one-time reduction of $500 million from local government; and $150 million from the Department of Corrections. The plan also would reduce state government staffing to 1998 levels, and raise student fees at UC and CSU by an additional 10%, and increase community college fees from $11 to $26 per unit (the amount recommended last February by the Legislative Analyst).

The budget proposal was developed by an 18-member bipartisan group organized by Richman and Canciamilla, but 16 of the lawmakers--all but Richman and Canciamilla --backed away from the plan, after Senate Minority Leader Jim Brulte’s threat to campaign against any Republican who agreed to a tax increase, and the Democratic leadership’s pointed opposition to any further cuts in social programs.

Barring public outcry to embrace it, most political observers see this budget proposal as Dead on Arrival. At the moment, though, it’s the only plan on the table.

4. Recall of the Governor generates interest among candidates to replace him. Rep. Darrell Issa heads the current list of Republicans wanting to be on the ballot, which could be either next November or next March, depending on when the recall petitions are submitted and the signatures verified by the Secretary of State. Other Republicans who have signaled an interest include Senator Tom McClintock (R - Simi Valley) who narrowly lost his race for Controller last November; actor Arnold Schwarzenegger; Bill Simon, Jr., who ran unsuccessfully against Gray Davis last year. Other names that have been proffered by others: Former Secretary of State Bill Jones, former L.A. Mayor Richard Riordan, and National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice. (Some political observers are looking ahead to the 2008 Presidential election, which might pit Rice against Senator Hillary Clinton. Others would like to see a gubernatorial race between U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein and Rice.)

Up until a few days ago, possible Democratic candidates included Lt. Governor Cruz Bustamante, Attorney General Bill Lockyer, state Treasurer Phil Angelides, state Insurance Commissioner John Garamendi, U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein--and most recently, Senate President pro Tempore John Burton. However, Bustamante, Lockyer, Angelides and Garamendi have all said they would not run in the recall election. (State Controller Steve Westly made a similar announcement, even though his name had not been mentioned as a potential candidate.) Senator Feinstein has not committed to run, but she has denounced the recall itself, recalling painful memories when she was the subject of an unsuccessful recall during her term as Mayor of San Francisco.

In a statement issued by his office, Bustamante said that he “will not attempt to advance my career at the expense of the people I was elected to serve.” On the other side, Senator Tom McClintock issued a statement indicating that while voters are “allowed to make mistakes [such as re-electing Governor Davis], the recall is there so that they don’t have to live with those mistakes for four years.”

Green Party candidate Peter Camejo, who ran last November, garnering 5% of the vote, has also indicated he would run in the recall election.

To qualify for the ballot, 890,000 valid signatures of registered voters must be submitted to the Secretary of State, although closer to 1.3 million will likely be collected to allow for invalid signatures. Once the Secretary of State has certified the required number of signatures, an election must be called within 60 to 80 days. Organizers of the recall have reported they have collected over 650,000 signatures to date. Republicans are hoping for a special fall election, when turnout of Democrats would more likely be low. To assure a fall election, the requisite number of signatures must be validated by September 4. Otherwise, the recall would be pushed forward to March 2--the date of the Primary Election, when a far greater number of Democrats will be going to the polls.

There have been 31 Gubernatorial Recall efforts in California’s history--none of which ever made it to a ballot. If the Davis petitions qualify, this recall would be the first.

“Recall trivia,” as reported in a recent issue of StateNet Capitol Journal: “Name the California Governor whose presidential ambitions were damaged after a recall effort surfaced: Hint #1: The recall was sparked by the Governor’s attempt to deal with a financial crisis by proposing tax increases and cuts in education and health care. Hint #2: The recall was first dismissed, but by June, the Governor’s allies were concerned enough to mount a counter effort. Answer: Ronald Reagan (1968).”

5. Candidates are beginning to weigh in already on another statewide office: state Attorney General. Former Governor and current Mayor of Oakland, Jerry Brown, recently told the San Francisco Chronicle that he is considering a run for the job in 2006, when incumbent Bill Lockyer will be termed out of office. The paper reported as other possible candidates Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley, and Governor Davis’ chief-of-staff Lynn Schenk. Two candidates who have already filed: State Senator Joe Dunn (D - Santa Ana) and former Assembly Member Rod Pacheco (R - Riverside).

6. State Supreme Court Justice is on the short list for the U.S. Supreme Court. Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, 78 and 73 respectively, are rumored to be considering retirement from the nation’s highest court, assuring President Bush of two appointments reflecting his conservative views. California Supreme Court Justice Janice Rogers Brown, appointed to the bench by former Governor Pete Wilson in 1996, is considered to be a front-runner.

Justice Brown was a controversial appointment in California, owing to her staunch conservative views on affirmative action, abortion, the death penalty and gun control. A recent profile on the justice in the San Jose Mercury News quoted one of the country’s leading civil rights attorneys, San Francisco’s Eva Paterson, as labeling Brown “another Clarence Thomas.” The paper also quoted USC Law School professor Erwin Chemerinksy’s observation that, “If she’s the president’s choice, it’s going to be a huge battle.”

The most often voiced criticism of Brown is the allegation that she uses her legal opinions to promote her personal views. The San Jose Mercury News reported that her approach “even rankles some of her colleagues, notably George, the chief justice, who has traded barbs with her innumerous court opinions.” However, legal experts who questioned her qualifications when she was appointed to the California Supreme Court no longer do so. Her supporters note her legal scholarship, her steely resolve, and her ability to write well-crafted opinions.

7. California’s Employment Development Department reports California lost 21,500 jobs in May. The job losses--which touched construction, manufacturing, trade, transportation and utilities, information, professional and business services and government--total more than the rest of the United States combined.

According to the EDD, agricultural employment stood at 341,000 jobs in May, a gain of 20,200 over the month, but down 76,500 compared with May 2002.

Alpine County reported the highest unemployment rate at 22.3%, followed by Imperial County at 17.1%. Counties with the lowest unemployment rates include San Luis Obispo at 2.9% and Santa Barbara at 3.4%. Los Angeles County’s unemployment rate for May was 6.3%

For additional detail, including comparative charts, visit the EDD’s website: http://www.edd.ca.gov/nwsrel06.htm

8. Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D - San Jose) has been elected to replace Rep. Sam Farr as head of the Democratic Congressional Delegation. The 53-member California delegation, the largest in the nation, includes 20 Republicans and 33 Democrats. Lofgren is the first women to head the Democratic Congressional Delegation, which has a majority of women in the group (17). Farr, widely respected by both political parties, has headed the Democratic delegation for 5 years, and is stepping down to spend more time as co-chair of the House Oceans Caucus.

9. Reps. Loretta and Linda Sanchez are the latest political figures to ink a book contract. Congressional Quarterly reports that the sisters, the first to serve in Congress, and who represent neighboring districts in Orange County--will “tell their life stories and talk about Hispanics and America’s future.” The book is scheduled to hit the streets just before the 2004 election. Loretta Sanchez would not reveal the size of the advance, stating only that it was a “very lucrative deal,” and that a ghostwriter will be engaged to assist in the drafting of the book.

10. At least California doesn’t have a swarm of crickets. The Daily Recorder reports that swarms of Mormon crickets are infesting Nevada, Utah and Idaho--possibly the worst infestation in decades. A resident of Elko, Nevada, observed, “It’s yucky. You drive down the street and they pop like bubble wrap.” Three years of drought and mild winters have provided ideal conditions for the insects to breed, according to the Daily Recorder account. “Their voracious appetites take in anything: sagebrush, alfalfa, wheat, barley, clover, seeds, grasses, vegetables. At a density of just one cricket per square yard, they can consume 38 pounds of forage per acre as they pass through an area. They don’t fly, but can hop and crawl a mile in a day and up to 50 miles in a season. And before they die in the fall, they lay the eggs that will become next year’s swarm.”

Now don’t you feel a little bit better about California’s $38 billion budget problem?

* NEW LEGISLATION OF INTEREST *
Note: Bills must be in print for 30 days before they can be heard by a committee.

ACR 116 (Yee) State History and Social Science Curriculum

This Assembly Concurrent Resolution urges the State Board of Education to take action to ensure that history and social science textbooks used in California schools in grade 10 fairly and accurately portray human rights violations and other historical atrocities in a comprehensive manner.

Introduced: June 19, 2003

* STATUS IF PREVIOUSLY INTRODUCED LEGISLATION *

AB 46 (Simitian) Identity Theft

Prohibits any university or college located in the state from using a social security number as a student identifier. Prohibits any employer from requiring an employee to use his or her social security number for any purpose other than taxes.

As amended on June 3, the bill would permit the use of a student’s social security number for certain purposes, including, but not limited to, internal verification or nonpublic administration or identification for communication with a third party who is authorized by the student to receive it.

The bill also now authorizes each university or college to develop a system of personal identifiers other than social security numbers for students.

Status: PASSED [51 - 29] by the full Assembly and sent forward to the Senate, June 5.

AB 60 (Dymally) CSU: African American Political Institute

Changes the name of the African American Political Institute at Cal State Northridge to the African American Political and Economic Institute. Authorizes the CSU Trustees to establish the Institute at the Dominguez Hills campus instead of the Northridge campus.

As amended on June 2, the bill states legislative intent that the institute be funded solely by grants and contributions from private sources. The bill specifically prohibits use of state funds, or resources supported by state funds, from being redirected to support the Institute. “State funds” is defined as General Fund moneys, funds from the California State Lottery Education Fund, student fee revenues, and reimbursements and other income that otherwise would be available for support of the educational mission of the CSU.

Status: PASSED [80 - 0] by the full Assembly, and sent forward to the Senate, June 3.

AB 655 (Liu) Reconstitution of the California Postsecondary Education Commission [CPEC]

As initially written, this bill sought to establish the California Higher Education Policy and Finance Commission (CHEPFC), as of July 1, 2005, and would consolidate within it the California Postsecondary Education Commission and the Student Aid Commission.

The bill also sought to remove the Bureau of Private Postsecondary and Vocational Education from the Department of Consumer Affairs and place it and its functions under the administration of the CHEPFC.

The intent of this bill was primarily to (1) consolidate within a single state agency key responsibilities for higher education planning and analysis, program administration and information system management; and (2) fully integrate student fee policy and financial aid policy with institutional funding and finance policies.

As amended on June 3, the bill now simply expresses the intent of the Legislature to consolidate the program responsibilities of the Student Aid Commission, the Bureau for Private Postsecondary and Vocation Education, and CPEC into a single state entity--without specifying any details.

Status: PASSED [48 - 31] by the full Assembly and sent forward to the Senate, June 4.

AB 1051 (Goldberg) Capital Facilities Fees

This bill would allow utility districts to unilaterally impose capital facilities fees (fees applied to public and private users of public utility facilities) on public agencies--which would include educational institutions, counties, cities, and any of their subdivisions.

Current law provides that such fees must be mutually agreed upon. Under compromise legislation enacted in 1988, educational agencies agreed to pay any capital facilities fees they had been paying in the past and agreed to allow those fees to increase automatically with inflation. In return, the utility districts agreed to limitations on new capital facilities fees, and fee increases above the inflation index. In addition, the fees had to be for facilities “actually serving” the affected agency, and they could be imposed only after negotiation and agreement between the assessing and the paying public agencies.

This bill would adversely affect the CSU and other public agencies by allowing utility districts to embed the full cost of their capital improvements for the infrastructure of their entire district into the CSU’s monthly bills, without regard to whether or not those facilities actually serve one of our campuses or facilities. This legislation could result in millions of dollars in additional costs to the CSU each year.

[Note: Senator Jim Costa (D - Fresno) introduced a similar bill, SB 1132, in the 1999 session. The CSU joined the University of California and a coalition of other public agencies in a statewide campaign to prevent it from moving forward. The bill passed out of the Senate, but stopped in the Assembly Appropriations Committee. This legislation could increase CSU utility bills by more than $1.5 million each year.]

Status: PASSED [5 - 2] by the Senate Local Government Committee, and referred to the Senate Education Committee, June 18.

[Note: Huge coalitions have emerged to support and oppose this legislation. Not surprisingly, supporters listed on the bill include 28 water districts and utilities, while 42 organizations--school districts, all three systems of public higher education, the state Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O’Connell, and state Attorney General Bill Lockyer--have all added their names to the opposition.]

AB 1778 (Committee on Higher Educ.) CSU: Omnibus Bill TRUSTEE BILL

This CSU sponsored “omnibus” bill contains a number of non-controversial and/or technical changes to the various codes. Should any matter covered in the bill garner any formal opposition, legislative policy dictates that it be removed from the bill.

The following proposals are included in the legislation:

· Repeal Government Code Section Pertaining to Lottery Payments. This proposal would delete an obsolete reference in the Code to the California Maritime Academy (CMA) Board of Governors, which no longer applies, given the CMA’s formal inclusion in the CSU.

· Amend Government Code Section Pertaining to CSU Lottery Education Fund to Reflect CSU Authority. This proposal would amend Government Code Section 8880.5 to conform to authority in the Education Code, which allows CSU discretion to deposit lottery funds in local trust accounts.

· Repeal Education Code Section Pertaining to Auxiliary Organization Obligations. Education Code Section 89911 was added to the Code by CSU-sponsored legislation in 1988 to enable favorable tax treatment of auxiliary organization revenue bonds. Since that time the IRS has issued a revenue ruling that assures favorable treatment, and this section is no longer necessary. It is therefore proposed that it be repealed.

· Amend Education Code Section to Update Internal Citation. This proposal would update an internal citation in Education Code Section 90404 pertaining to the CSU’s mission, which is located in a different code section than it was at the time that Section 90404 was adopted.

None of the above proposals should result in a fiscal impact--cost or savings--to the CSU or the state.

Status: PASSED [76 - 0] by the full Assembly and sent forward to the Senate, May 15. PASSED [11 - 0] by the Senate Education Committee, June 11.

AJR 3 (Horton) Reauthorization of the Higher Education Act of 1965: Student Financial Aid

As initially written, this Assembly Joint Resolution sought to memorialize the Congress and the President of the United States to repeal a provision of the 1998 amendments to the federal Higher Education Act of 1965 that denies or delays access to financial aid based upon convictions for drug-related offenses.

As amended on June 3, the bill now seeks to amend the provision to exempt individuals who have been convicted of minor drug possession offenses and have successfully completed rehabilitation programs. As amended, the measure would additionally provide that a new section should be included on the instruction page for the federal student financial aid application that explains and clarifies this issue.

Status: PASSED [48 - 24] by the full Assembly and sent forward to the Senate, June 4. [Note: This bill initially failed passage by the full Assembly on May 15. The author requested reconsideration and accepted amendments that allowed the measure to be adopted.]

SB 25 (Bowen) Personal Information: Security

This bill contains numerous provisions relating to “fraud alerts” placed in credit reports, when consumers suspect they may be victims of identity theft.

Of interest to the CSU are provisions in the bill that would extend to state and local government agencies--including public colleges and universities--a prohibition on the use of Social Security numbers as a personal identifier. In this one regard, SB 25 is similar to Assembly Member Joseph Simitian’s AB 46, which also seeks to prohibit any public college or university located in California from using a social security number as a student identifier.

Status: PASSED [26 - 13] by the Senate & sent forward to the Assembly, June 4.

PASSED [10 - 3] by the Assembly Judiciary Committee and referred to the Assembly Banking and Finance Committee, June 17.

[Note: In both cases, the vote was cast along partisan lines, with Democrats supporting and Republicans opposing the bill. Opponents--which include the California Community Colleges system--raise concerns about the cost of the bill’s extension of existing Social Security number protections to state and local agencies.

In its letter to the committee members, the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges stated agreement with the policies contained in the bill, but noted that compliance would cost an estimated $16 million. The system requested that the California Community College districts be exempted from compliance with SB 25’s requirements.]

Return to Archive List

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

June 6, 2003

CAPITOL NEWS

1. Lobbyist spending in California puts the state at the top of the list. As reported in StateNet Capitol Journal, the Washington D.C.-based Center for Public Integrity recently concluded a nationwide study of lobbyist expenditures and disclosure. In California, 1,012 lobbyists spent over $192 million during 2002. New York was a distant second with 3,332 lobbyists spending $92 million. (A $100 million spread between the top two states!) Massachusetts was ranked third with 650 lobbyists spending nearly $54 million.

On the plus side, California ranked 8 in effectiveness of its disclosure requirements. New York and Massachusetts ranked fifth and sixth, respectively. At the bottom of the heap: Pennsylvania, which ranked 50^th because its state Supreme Court recently jettisoned its lobbyist regulations. The state currently does not have regulations requiring lobbyists to register, or to report gifts and contributions made to lawmakers.

2. Initiative Update. Three measures have qualified for the March 2, 2004 ballot:

· K-University Facilities Bond Act of 2004. This measure constitutes the second part of the two public education bond acts provided for in AB 16 last year. Part one authorized the sale of $13.05 billion in General Obligation bonds and was passed by voters last November. Part two authorizes the sale of $12.3 billion in GO bonds.

· ACA 11: Financing Infrastructure Needs. This measure provides for a specified percentage of money from the state General Fund--beginning initially with 1%, increasing by .3% for seven years until a level of 3% is reached--to be deposited into a special fund for allocation by the Legislature solely for the construction, rehabilitation, or repair of the state’s infrastructure: transportation, roads, water system, parks, and natural resources.

· Classification by Race, Ethnicity, Color or National Origin. Also known as the Racial Privacy Act, this initiative seeks to prohibit state and local governments from using race, ethnicity, color or national origin to classify current or prospective students, contractors, or employees in public education, contracting or employment operations. The measure contains two exemptions: It allows law enforcement agencies to continue collecting data based on race, ethnicity, color or national origin; it also allows the collection of such data that is mandated by the federal government. Ward Connerly, who authored Proposition 209, the successful 1996 initiative prohibiting affirmative action in public education, contracting, and employment, is also the author of this initiative.

There are currently 7 measures in circulation and 11 other measures pending title and summary in the state Attorney General’s Office. One of the 7 and 3 of the 11 all relate to “banning the cruel confinement of pregnant pigs in tiny crates too small even to turn around in, causing tremendous frustration and psychological suffering.”

I was about to say “only in California”--but voters in Florida passed a similar initiative last November.

Another of the 7 measures in circulation seeks to fine citizens eligible to vote, but who fail to register and vote, the sum of $50.

3. One way to reduce state budget spending: Eliminate the office of Lt. Governor. StateNet Capitol Journal notes that eight states currently operate without a lieutenant governor, with the secretary of state or the president of the state Senate assuming the mantle of the state should the Governor become incapacitated. The eight states functioning without a lieutenant governor are: Arizona, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Oregon, Tennessee, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

According to Capitol Journal, Wisconsin could become the ninth state if a lawmaker’s proposal to close down the lieutenant governor’s office is adopted. Two other states--Kentucky and Virginia--have cut the budgets and staff of their lieutenant governors significantly.

4. Today’s trivia, from the on-line edition of Congressional Quarterly: Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D - Santa Rosa, CA) is the only member of Congress who was once a single parent on welfare.

* STATUS OF PREVIOUSLY INTRODUCED LEGISLATION *

AB 491 (Diaz) California State University: Adequate Funding

This bill relates to the recent CMS Audit Report, which was critical of the way in which the CSU system acquired and implemented a comprehensive information management technology system linking all 23 campuses and the Chancellor’s Office together.

As initially written, the bill sought to impose a number of requirements:

· Requires any information technology project exceeding $100,000 to receive independent oversight and prior approval from the Director of Finance;

· Requires the Trustees to establish quantitative measures of increased business process efficiencies for information technology (IT) projects, and requires that before a contract can be entered into, the CSU must provide an analysis of the relative merits and projected costs;

· CSU to adopt regulations requiring a feasibility study; CSU to undertake “self study and cost justification analysis” prior to issuing any RFP;

· Requires CSU to disclose any vendor donations made prior to any IT project contract;

· CSU to plan project procurements to share risks with vendors and consultants;

· CSU to hire independent oversight consultant to perform various quality assurance functions and to evaluate progress of IT projects;

· Requires the CSU to take prescribed actions to safeguard electronic records that contain confidential student information; and

· Deletes two exemptions from current law that are currently in place for the CSU: (1) prior approval by the Department of General Services of any contract entered into for the hiring or purchase of goods and services, and (2) existing provisions in law relating to the acquisition of information technology goods and services, including the procurement of materials, supplies, equipment, and services by state agencies. [Note: The exemptions from the current law remain in place for the UC and Community Colleges’ systems.]

On June 2, the bill was substantially amended:

· The $100,000 cap was raised to $250,000; project oversight by the Dept. of finance and contract oversight by the Dept. of General Services would now be required;

· CSU to adopt regulations requiring a feasibility study and a cost benefit analysis--but in conjunction now with the Departments of Finance and General Services;

· The requirement that the Trustees establish quantitative measures of increased business process efficiencies for IT projects has been deleted;

· In addition to the disclosure requirement regarding vendor donations, the CSU would also now be required to submit quarterly reports to the Secretary of State, the Department of Finance, and the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

The remaining provisions were unchanged.

The bill was amended again on the Assembly Floor on June 4: The $250,000 cap was raised to $1 million, and oversight by the Dept. of General Services was deleted.

Status: PASSED [17 - 7] by the Assembly Appropriations Committee, May 28. [Note: The vote was cast along partisan lines, with Democrats supporting and Republicans opposing the bill.]

PASSED [51 - 3] by the Assembly and sent forward to the Senate,

June 4. [Note: Democrats cast 37 of the aye votes and Republicans, 13. All 3 of the No votes were cast by Republicans. Of the 26 lawmakers who were present and not voting, 10 were Democrats and 16 were Republican.]

[Note on AB 491: CSU continues to have concerns about this bill. Eleventh hour amendments did not address the primary one about the multiple layers of costly bureaucracy it adds for the state and the university, which will require significant additional staff at CSU and the Department of Finance. Moreover, the bill seems overly punitive. The CSU has complied with, or is in the process of complying with, all 30 of the recommendations contained in the CMS Audit. Senator John Burton is carrying legislation sponsored by the Trustees that specifically addresses conflict-of-interest and ethics training issues, and Chancellor Reed has issued Executive Order 862 to establish feasibility study requirements for IT projects exceeding $500,000.

CSU believes that AB 491 removes the system’s ability to independently manage its policies and practices related to IT project management and will add considerable costs and lead times to projects--adding from 6 to 7 months to average project cycles.

As AB 491 proceeds through the legislative process, CSU will continue to argue for amendments that will not impose layers of process in the name of efficiency and effectiveness.]

AB 593 (Ridley-Thomas) Voter Registration

This bill seeks to require the Secretary of State to perform certain administrative duties to facilitate voter registration--among which is to provide voter registration forms and information to students in all high schools, community colleges, and campuses of the California State University and the University of California.

[Note: The Secretary of State already provides the forms and information to these entities. Cal State Northridge typically receives 5000 registration forms, which are distributed to students at Freshman Orientation, at campus voter registration drives, and stacked at sites on campus having heavy foot traffic--e.g., Student Union, University Library, Bookstore, and Student Housing.]

Status: PASSED [17 - 7] by the Assembly Appropriations Committee, May 28.

PASSED [48 - 31] by the full Assembly and sent forward to the Senate, June 2.

[Note: As was the case with the earlier policy committee vote, the vote in the fiscal committee was cast along partisan lines, with Democrats supporting and Republicans opposing the bill. Ditto the Floor vote. Republicans generally oppose this bill because of a projected annual cost to the state of $180,000 to implement it. Governor Davis has vetoed similar legislation in the past on the same grounds.]

AB 858 (Goldberg) Athletic Team Names and Mascots

As initially introduced, this bill sought to establish the Jerry Ballesteros Act, which would prohibit public schools from using certain specified terms relating to Native American tribal names, as a school or athletic team name, mascot, or nickname; and additionally states that the State Board of Education may not waive the prohibition.

As amended on April 10, the bill deletes reference to Jerry Ballesteros and instead names the proposed law the California Racial Mascots Act.

The bill provides for certain exemptions: (1) It would not apply to a school or campus if certain conditions regarding prior expenditures on uniforms and other materials are met (eg: if they were purchased before January 1, 2004, and if the school selects a new school or athletic team name, mascot, or nickname); and (2) it would also not apply to certain schools located within “Indian country,” as defined.

Status: PASSED [15 - 8] by the Assembly Appropriations Committee, May 28. [Note: Democrat Patricia Wiggins (Santa Rosa) joined the Republican members in casting a No vote on this bill.]

FAILED Passage [31 - 37] by the full Assembly, June 5. [Note: The vote on the Floor was cast along partisan lines, with Republicans opposing and Democrats supporting the bill. Twelve members were present but declined to vote.]

[Note on AB 858: This bill is essentially a reintroduction of AB 2115, introduced last year by Assembly Member Goldberg. That bill also failed passage in the state Assembly, on a vote of 29 - 35. The vote was 12 shy of the 41-vote majority she needed to advance her bill to the Senate.

Republican opposition was essentially the same as for the earlier bill: They see team names as a source of school pride, and not as demeaning to any ethnic race or group. Assembly Member Tim Leslie (R - Tahoe City) broke into song at one point, singing the alma mater of his high school, home of the Apaches. Democrats, on the other hand, do see team mascots named after ethnic groups as offensive both to the culture and to the people.

No word from Assembly Member Goldberg on whether she intends to pursue her bill a third time next year.]

AB 1185 (Montanez) CSU: Administrative Costs

This bill would require the Chancellor’s Office of the California State University, and each of the 23 campuses within the system, to provide annual reports, by January 1 of each year, to the Department of Finance, the Office of the Legislative Analyst, and the appropriate legislative budget and policy committees, providing the following information:

· A detailed analysis of the administrative costs incurred in the previous fiscal year;

· The percentage of general purpose funds devoted to administrative costs in the previous fiscal year; and

· The percent increase or decrease in total administrative costs from the year prior to the previous fiscal year.

The bill requires that these annual reports be prepared within existing resources by the system and the campuses.

The bill defines “administrative costs” as general purpose funds expended for (1) salaries and benefits of executive management, administrators, supervisors, and managers of the Chancellor’s Office and of each campus of the CSU, who are not represented by a union; and (2) administrative overhead costs incurred to support administrative functions and administrative positions not represented by a union, including, but not limited to the following: Car and housing allowances, travel, supplies and equipment, leases, computing support, contractual services, public relations and communications, information technology, consulting fees, and conference, training and seminar attendance.

Status: PASSED [17 - 7] by Assembly Appropriations Committee, May 28. [Note: The vote was cast along partisan lines, with Democrats supporting and Republicans opposing the bill.]

PASSED [45 - 24] by the full Assembly and sent forward to the Senate, June 3. [Note: Assembly Member Keith Richman (R - Northridge) joined Assembly Democrats in supporting the bill. All of the No votes were cast by Republicans.]

AB 1219 (Montanez) Inmate Education

Existing law establishes the position of Superintendent of Correctional Education. This bill would eliminate this position and establish instead the Robert E. Burton Correctional Education Board within the Department of Corrections to approve education programs in prisons.

The Board, which would comprise 15 members, including one representative each from the UC, CSU, and the California Community Colleges system, would be required to approve the education programs, and to adopt rules and regulations for the admission of inmate students to them.

The bill would additionally require the Board to submit a report to the Legislature on or before January 1, 2006, with recommendations for further reorganization of correctional education in California, focusing on attaining parallel education structures between correctional and public education, funding sources, and correctional student rights.

[Note: Two similar bills (SB 1845 in 1999-2000 and SB 404 in 2001-02), both authored by former Senator Richard Polanco, were vetoed by Governor Davis because both would have resulted in major General Fund costs that had not been included in the Budget Act for those respective years.]

Status: PASSED [17 - 7] by the Assembly Appropriations Committee, May 28.

PASSED [41 - 35] by the full Assembly and sent forward to the Senate, June 5. [Note: The votes, both in the Committee and on the Floor, were cast along partisan lines, with Democrats supporting and Republicans opposing the bill.]

AB 1465 (McLeod) CSU: Continuing Education

This bill seeks to require, as a part of the annual independent audit of the California State University system, that there be a full accounting of the funds related to the CSU’s continuing education program. As initially written, the bill required the audit to indicate the balance of every relevant fund at each CSU campus, and report how much revenue is generated from the following areas of continuing education: Certificate programs, off-campus degrees, corporate training, online programs and degrees, special emphasis programs, professional development, and test preparation.

As amended on April 24, the bill would require the audit instead to indicate the total systemwide revenues and expenditures for continuing education programs during the audit year, and indicate the current level of retained earnings for continuing education programs, in addition to reporting how much revenue is generated from the areas listed above.

[Note: Continuing education programs are self-supporting, and are not funded by General Fund dollars.]

Status: PASSED [17 - 7] by the Assembly Appropriations Committee, May 28.

PASSED [49 - 30] by the full Assembly and sent forward to the Senate, June 5.

[Notes: (1) The votes, both in the Committee and on the Floor were cast along partisan lines, with Democrats supporting and Republicans opposing the bill.

(2) The CSU opposes AB 1465 because to report the revenues and expenditures by the operational program subsets identified in the bill would require an entirely new level of tracking and categorization by campus, at tremendous cost. Moreover, the 23 campuses might interpret the definitions of what would be included in each of the areas differently, causing problems in any subsequent comparisons or summaries made.

Campuses currently report Continuing Education revenues and expenditures as they do for other campus operations, using program codes and sub-codes that have been established by the National Association of College and University Business Officers. These codes are not organized around operational programs, such as certificate programs and off-campus degrees, but rather around the same categories as other campus expenditures: Instruction, Academic Support, Student Services, and the like.]

SB 302 (Kuehl) Discrimination: State Programs and Activities

Existing law prohibits discrimination against any person in any program or activity conducted, operated, or administered by the state or by any state agency, or that is funded directly by the state, or that receives any financial assistance from the state.

Existing law also requires, with respect to disability, that these programs and activities meet the protections and prohibitions contained in the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and the implementing rules and regulations accompanying that Act.

SB 302 would specifically apply these provisions to the California State University.

Status: PASSED [13 - 0] by the Senate Appropriations Committee, May 29.

PASSED [40 - 0] by the full Senate and sent forward to the Assembly, June 5.

SB 383 (Alarcon) College Preparatory Commission

This bill would establish a Postsecondary Readiness Commission, whose 13 members would be appointed by the Governor, the Senate Rules Committee, and the Speaker of the Assembly. [Note: Among the specified appointments to be made by the Governor would be a representative from the University of California. The representative from the CSU would be among the appointments made by the Senate Rules Committee, and the representative from the California Community College system would be among those made by the Assembly Speaker.]

The bill would require the Commission to recommend a model postsecondary readiness curriculum for public high schools to the State Board of Education prior to November 1, 2006. The bill specifies the commission may use any state funds appropriated by the Legislature to produce the curriculum, and it also authorizes the Commission to apply for and accept grants and receive gifts, donations, and other financial support from public or private sources.

The bill provides for a January 1, 2007 sunset date.

Status: PASSED [7 - 5] by the Senate Appropriations Committee, May 29.

PASSED [23 - 12] by the full Senate and sent forward to the Assembly, June 4. [Note: The votes both in the Committee and on the Floor were cast along partisan lines, with Democrats supporting and Republicans opposing the bill.]

[Note on SB 383: Senator John Vasconcellos (D - San Jose) has a Master Plan sponsored bill, SB 550, that addresses a variety of education issues, including the development of a statewide postsecondary readiness curriculum similar to the one proposed by SB 383. Vasconcellos’ bill, however, requires the State Board of Education to create this curriculum, rather than appointing a statewide commission to develop the model curriculum. SB 550 is currently on Suspense in the Senate Appropriations Committee.]

SB 821 (Alarcon) Business Ethics Courses

This bill would mandate the CSU and the California Community Colleges, and would request the UC and accredited private and independent colleges and universities, to require students enrolled in MBA programs to successfully complete two courses in ethics in order to be eligible to receive the Golden State Business and Social Responsibility Award, which this bill would create.

Students would also be required to complete a minimum of 50 hours of community service. Upon completion of the courses and community service, students would have affixed to their diplomas the seal of the state Senate, the Assembly, or the Governor.

Status: PASSED [23 - 13] by the full Senate and sent forward to the Assembly, June 4. [Note: The vote was cast along partisan lines. Democrats supported the bill. Republicans opposed it generally for two reasons: (1) the costs to students in lengthening the time to degree, and (2) CSU already incorporates ethics components in existing business courses.]

Return to Archive List

May 23, 2003

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

CAPITOL NEWS

1. Delegations from all 23 CSU campuses descended on the state Capitol this week. The mission was to persuade legislators to resist budget reductions exceeding those contained in the Governor’s May Revise (the Governor’s January budget, updated to include estimates of revenues and expenditures after the third quarter and following the April 15 tax receipts). If adopted by the Legislature, the proposed budget will reduce the CSU by $260.7 million, or 10% of its budget.

In general, the May Revise shows the state budget deficit to be $38.2 billion, up $3.6 billion from January. To fill this maw, the Governor has cobbled together a patchwork of cuts, shifts, loans, and taxes--a mix significantly different from his January proposal, as the chart below (adapted from one appearing in the Los Angeles Times) shows:

	January	May
Cuts/savings:	$20.7 billion	$18.9 billion
Deficit financing, to be repaid by
1/2 cent sales tax:	- 0 -	10.7
Shift control of specified state health
programs to the counties:	8.3	1.7
Loans and borrowing:	1.78	2.9
Vehicle License Fee increase:	- 0 -	4.2
Fees on Tribal gambling:	1.5	0.7

In this reshaped plan, both K-12 and higher education benefited--with K-12 seeing a restoration of $700 million (to protect its Class Size Reduction Program), and the community college system, $304 million (which reduces the proposed increase in student fees from $24 to $18 per unit.) The UC and CSU did not receive any restorations--but also did not sustain any additional cuts.

The CSUN delegation met with Assembly Members Carol Liu, Lloyd Levine, Keith Richman and Cindy Montanez, and with the education consultants or chiefs of staff to Senators Sheila Kuehl, Jack Scott, and to Assembly Member Fran Pavley. All expressed a degree of support for holding the level of reductions to the Governor’s May Revise, but there is a wide range of disagreement about several of the Governor’s proposals.

Republicans generally liked the Governor’s adoption of their financing plan, which spreads out the current year’s $10.7 billion deficit over the next five years, but deplored the $8 billion in new taxes--with the increase in the Vehicle License Fee an especially hot button. Democrats liked the restorations to education, particularly to the community colleges, but balked at the continued severe cuts for health and welfare programs.

There are currently three other budget proposals circulating in the Legislature, all three of which propose additional steep cuts in the CSU’s budget. A thumbnail sketch of each plan, in ascending order of damage:

· The Assembly Democratic Plan proposes a $69.5 million reduction which would require either a 12.5% increase in undergraduate fees above the 25% proposed in the Governor’s January Budget, or a combination of an enrollment reduction of 3.1% (10,540 FTES) and a personnel reduction of 1,079 employees (496 faculty, 583 non-faculty).

· The Senate Republican Plan proposes a reduction of $182 million, which would require either a 32.6% increase in undergraduate student fees, or an 8.1% reduction in enrollment (27,601 FTES) and a personnel reduction of 2,826 employees (1,298 faculty, 1,528 non-faculty).

· The Assembly Republican Plan proposes a $200 million reduction, requiring either a 35.8% increase in undergraduate student fees or reducing enrollment by 8.8% (30,331 FTES) and personnel by 3,106 employees (1,426 faculty, 1,680 non-faculty).

From the reports of the 23 campus delegations at the end of the day of meetings with legislators, it does not seem likely that either of the Republican proposals will be adopted. There is a strong probability, however, that the Democratic plan--or a compromise between that plan and the May Revise--will be the one reaching the Governor’s Desk. To the extent that agreement on the plan or a compromise can be effected--not just between the Democrats and Republicans, but within the Democratic Party itself--will determine whether a budget can be approved by the Constitutional deadline of July 1.

In the last 20 years, the Constitutional deadline has been missed 14 times. Three budgets were delivered on time, and three were delivered before the deadline (2 were two days early, and 1 was three days early).

2. City Election sees tiny turn-out. A little less than 9% of voters eligible to vote in the special May 20 election actually showed up at the polls. In the 12^th District, which includes CSUN, the ballot contained three issues: two run-offs (City Council and the Los Angeles Community College District Office No. 3) and the local Community College District Bond, Proposition AA. There were no upsets. Greig Smith, Chief of Staff to the incumbent, termed out City Council Member, Hal Bernson, won handily with 61.43% of the vote. Mona Field, the incumbent on the Community College District Board, was re-elected by a similarly large margin (64.33%).

Despite opposition by both the Los Angeles Times and the Daily News, Proposition AA was supported by a surprisingly large number of those voting: 64.06%. Both papers editorialized against the measure, and, in addition, the Daily News carried several negative articles in the few weeks leading up to the election.

Julie Korenstein’s loss in her bid for the 12^th City Council seat, together with David Tokofsky’s re-election to the Los Angeles Unified School Board, ensures that the Board will again have a majority of union-backed members. Four years ago, former Mayor Richard Riordan and financier Eli Broad formed a PAC, “Coalition for Kids,” to seek out reform-minded candidates not aligned with the union, and succeeded in electing a majority of them to the School Board. Coalition-backed incumbents, Genethia Hudley-Hayes and Caprice Young, both lost their seats in the March 4 election. The change in majority will likely have significant impact on the future of charter schools within the LAUSD, since the union has consistently raised questions about their efficacy and financing. Given the huge popularity of charter schools in the Valley, it will be interesting to watch the conflict unfold--and see whether the results might impact the next election cycle.

3. State’s population continues to grow. In a report released May 5, the California Department of Finance noted that the state’s population rose in 2002 by 591,000, or by 1.7% over 2001. California’s population now stands at 35,591,000, increasing the pressure on state services, roads, housing, and schools. The City of Los Angeles increased its population by 59,000, and the county of Los Angeles by 162,200 during the same time period. To access the full report, go to this website: http://www.dof.ca.gov/html/demograp/E-1table2.xls

* NEW LEGISLATION OF INTEREST *
Note: Bills must be in print for 30 days before they can be heard by a committee.

SB 821 (Alarcon) Business Ethics Courses

As amended on May 13, this bill would mandate the CSU and the California Community Colleges, and would request the UC and accredited private and independent colleges and universities, to require students enrolled in MBA programs to successfully complete two courses in ethics in order to be eligible to receive the Golden State Business and Social Responsibility Award, which this bill would create.

Status: Placed in the Suspense File by the Senate Appropriations Committee, May 19.

* STATUS OF PREVIOUSLY INTRODUCED LEGISLATION *

AB 222 (Corbett) Library Bond Act

This bill seeks to enact the California Reading and Literacy Improvement and Public Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act of 2004, for submission to the voters at the March 2, 2004 Primary Election. As introduced, the bill did not contain a specified amount of money.

As amended on May 1, the bill now provides that, if voters pass the Bond Act, $4.47 billion in bonds would be sold for the purpose of financing library construction and renovation, pursuant to a program administered by the State Librarian.

The bill contains an Urgency clause, declaring that it is to take effect immediately upon the Governor’s signature.

Status: PASSED [6 - 2] by the Assembly Local Government Committee and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, May 7, where it was put in the Suspense File.

[NOTE: At state Treasurer Phil Angelides’ request, all bills containing bond proposals have been placed on hold, pending resolution of the state Budget crisis. Angelids, in his letter to legislators, said that there must be “a viable plan to fix the structural imbalances between what the state spends and what it takes in” before he could support placing any additional bond measures on the ballot.

This moratorium includes the above Library Bond Act proposal, but does not include the $12.3 billion K - University Bond measure that is currently set for the March 2004 ballot. That measure is one of two education bond acts authorized by AB 16, authored by former Assembly Speaker Bob Hertzberg last year.]

AB 618 (Levine) Vehicles: Special License Plates

As initially introduced, this bill sought to establish a special license plate program for collegiate sports organizations and professional sports teams. It would have required the funds derived under the program to be deposited in the Title IX Compliance Account, which the bill would establish in the General Fund. The bill specified that money expended from the account be used to promote women’s participation in high school and collegiate sports.

As amended on May 12, the bill now provides that the funds derived under this program, less the DMV’s administrative costs, be deposited into the existing Motor Vehicle Account in the State Transportation Fund. [Note: The bill still requires the funds to be made available for expenditure as initially specified.]

As amended on May 22, the bill references existing law which prohibits the DMV from issuing a special interest license plate until the participating organization has received and submitted to the department 7,500 applications for the plate within a specified time period.

Status: PASSED [23 - 0] by the Assembly Appropriations Committee, May 7.

AB 655 (Liu) Reconstitution of the California Postsecondary Education Commission [CPEC]

As initially written, this bill would reconstitute CPEC as a 9-member commission, as of July 1, 2004. As amended on April 10, the bill establishes in CPEC’s place the California Higher Education Policy and Finance Commission (CHEPFC), as of July 1, 2005.

It would repeal the statute establishing the Student Aid Commission, and place all of its functions under the administration of the CHEPFC. The bill also would remove the Bureau of Private Postsecondary and Vocational Education from the Department of Consumer Affairs and place it and its functions under the administration of the CHEPFC.

The intent of this bill is primarily to (1) consolidate within a single state agency key responsibilities for higher education planning and analysis, program administration and information system management; and (2) fully integrate student fee policy and financial aid policy with institutional funding and finance policies.

Status: PASSED [7 - 0] by the Assembly Higher Education Committee and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, May 1. The bill was held in the Committee’s Suspense File on May 14. [Note: Absent a rule waiver, all bills with cost factors exceeding $150,000 are being placed in the Senate and Assembly Suspense files, to be considered collectively and prioritized at a later date.]

AB 1051 (Goldberg) Capital Facilities Fees

Status: PASSED [67 - 0] by the Assembly & sent forward to the Senate, May 8.

AB 1250 (Laird) Teacher Development: Bias and Discrimination

As initially introduced, this bill sought to establish a program of ongoing professional instruction for teachers on the prevention of bias and discrimination in the public schools.

Existing law authorizes the state Superintendent of Public Instruction to provide school districts and charter schools with a staff development allowance for teachers who participate in staff development of instructional methods, including among other things, teaching strategies and other training designed to improve pupil performance.

As amended on May 5, this bill “would additionally authorize the allowance to be used for training designed to improve intolerance and hatred prevention.”

The bill specifies that its provisions be operative in any fiscal year only to the extent that funds are provided in the annual Budget.

Status: PASSED on the Assembly Consent Calendar, May 21, and sent forward to the Senate on the same date.

ACR 86 (Maze) Higher Education in the 34^th District

As initially introduced, Assembly Concurrent Resolution 76 made a Legislative declaration of the need to study whether a four-year university should be located in the 34^th Assembly District. The measure resolved that the UC and the CSU should jointly undertake a study to determine where to locate a campus or satellite campus in Tulare, Kings, Kern, or Fresno County, in order to increase access to residents of those counties to attaining a baccalaureate degree. The bill required the study to be submitted to the Legislature by January 1, 2005.

As amended on May 13, the measure resolves that the study determine whether to locate a campus in the 34^th Assembly district. The measure also now requires the California Postsecondary Education Commission to review and comment on the conclusions and recommendations in the study and to report back to the Legislature by May 1, 2005. Finally, the bill requires the Legislature to conduct a public hearing on both reports.

Status: PASSED [6 - 0] by the Assembly Higher Education Committee and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, May 6, where it was placed in the Suspense File.

AJR 3 (Horton) Reauthorization of the Higher Education Act of 1965: Student Financial Aid

This Assembly Joint Resolution would memorialize the Congress and the President of the United States to repeal a provision of the 1998 amendments to the federal Higher Education Act of 1965 that denies or delays access to financial aid based upon convictions for drug-related offenses.

Status: PASSED [6 - 3] by the Assembly Higher Education Committee, May 6. FAILED PASSAGE [46 - 23] by the full Assembly, May 15. The author has requested reconsideration.

AJR 9 (Firebaugh) Undocumented Students

This Assembly Joint Resolution seeks to memorialize the President and Congress of the United States to enact legislation to reform the federal Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 to allow states to set appropriate residency requirements and tuition policies for undocumented students.

Status: PASSED [7 - 3] by the Assembly Higher Education Committee, May 6; PASSED [46 - 23] by the full Assembly and sent forward to the Senate, May 15.

SB 6 (Alpert) K - University Master Plan: Public Education Governance

This bill and the one below will ultimately be part of a package of nine bills introduced to implement recommendations of the Joint Legislative Committee on Developing a

K - University Master Plan, delivered to the Legislature in August 2002.

As initially introduced, SB 6 sought, among other things, to shift authority over public school operations from the elected Superintendent of Public Instruction to the Governor’s Office. It sought also to establish the California Education Commission to serve as the statewide education data repository from pre-kindergarten to postsecondary education, and to require the State Board of Education to be drawn from and represent distinct geographical regions of the state and to reflect ethnic diversity.

The most controversial provisions of the bill related to the above mentioned change in the state superintendent’s powers, and to a proposed change in the governance structure of the California Community College system, assigning accountability for systemwide governance and representation to the state Board of Governors, and giving the statewide chancellor’s office more power to implement policies.

As amended on May 15, both of these provisions have been deleted.

Status: PASSED [7 - 2] by the Senate Education Committee, May 7; placed in the Suspense file by the Senate Appropriations Committee, May 19.

SB 279 (Chesbro) Student Fee Waivers - Extension of Sunset Date

Existing law requires CSU and UC tuition and fees to be waived for surviving children of firefighters and law enforcement personnel employed by public agencies, or who were employed as a contractor or as an employee of a contractor, performing services for a public agency, who have been killed in the performance of duty.

As initially written, in a bill authored by Senator Chesbro in 1999, the law is scheduled to sunset on January 1, 2004. This bill would extend the benefit indefinitely.

On May 15, SB 279 was amended to limit its provisions to undergraduate students and to provide that the annual income of any children, including the value of any support received from a parent, does not exceed the national poverty level, as defined in the Education Code.

Status: PASSED [10 - 0] by the Senate Appropriations Committee, May 19, and by the full Senate (on the Consent Calendar for non-controversial bills), May 22. The bill was sent forward to the Assembly on the same date.

SB 971 (Burton) CSU: Outside Employment TRUSTEE BILL

This bill would require executive, Management Personnel Plan (MPP), and academic employees to report on outside employment and business activities to ensure that such activities do not constitute a conflict of interest with CSU employment or conflict with normal work assignments or the performance of duties.

The bill would also prohibit an employee of the CSU from being a consultant or an employee of a for-profit business entity that provides services to the university. It would additionally require the CSU to offer ethics training to each employee who is required to file a Statement of Economic Interests in accordance with current law.

Status: PASSED [34 - 1] by the Senate, and sent forward to the Assembly, May 22.

[Notes: (1) The University of California requires disclosure of outside employment or business activities, but current law does not require similar disclosure by CSU executives, managers, supervisors, or full-time faculty unit employees. (2) Senator John Vasconcellos (D - San Jose) cast the sole dissenting vote, based on his belief that a requirement imposed on faculty to report outside employment ought to be subject to collective bargaining.]

Return to Archive List

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

May 9, 2003

CAPITOL NEWS

1. Budget impasse could threaten state employee salaries. The last time the state faced a fiscal crisis involving a large deficit and lack of consensus on how to close the gap was in 1992-93. The budget impasse lasted 64 days before it was finally settled. State employees were paid with IOUs. The California Supreme Court ruled unanimously on May 1 that about 200,000 of the state’s employees could only be paid the federal minimum wage ($5.15 per hour)--or not paid at all--if a budget is not passed by the Constitutional deadline of July 1.

The court’s decision resolved a case filed 6 years ago by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers’ Association regarding the constitutional legality of paying bills in the absence of an approved budget. Chief Justice Ronald M. George penned the opinion that said state workers who are paid by the hour, and who are not paid overtime in a particular pay period, are entitled only to the minimum wage under federal labor law (which explains why the state’s minimum wage, $6.75 per hour, does not apply). In an odd quirk in the federal law, state hourly workers who work overtime during a particular pay period are entitled to their full salary.

About one-fourth or 56,000 of the 200,000 employees are not subject to the federal statute and would not be eligible to receive their salaries. This group includes managers, supervisors and appointed employees, as well as professionals such as lawyers, engineers and dentists--and legislative staff. Two groups of employees are protected by the state Constitution and thus are not affected by the federal law or the Supreme Court ruling: employees of the court and of the University of California system.

Citing language in Chief Justice George’s opinion that implied wages could be paid if it was not feasible to do otherwise, State Controller Steve Westly said he would continue to issue state paychecks if a budget is not passed by July 1. A spokesperson for the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers’ Association took issue with Westly’s interpretation and vowed to file another lawsuit if checks are issued.

All state employees would receive their full pay retroactively, once a budget is approved.

State employee unions jumped all over the Court’s opinion--and at legislators--for making state employees unwitting victims in the state’s annual budget cataclysm. In the understatement of the year, Assembly Member Jackie Goldberg (D - Los Angeles) was quoted in the San Jose Mercury News, “This will put a lot of pressure on both sides to get our work done on time.”

2. Ward Connerly’s Racial Privacy Initiative, which is scheduled to appear on the March 2004 ballot is not polling well, according to CalPeek. The political newsletter reports a recent Field Poll showed only 11% are even aware of the measure, as opposed to the 26% who knew about it a year ago when it was initially circulated. Of those surveyed, 48% would vote yes and 33% no, with 19% having no opinion.

Connerly’s Initiative is patterned after his earlier, successful effort, Proposition 209, which banned affirmative action in state hiring, contracting and public education. That Initiative polled very strong support among voters--78%, according to CalPeek.

If passed by voters, Connerly’s Initiative would prohibit the state from classifying individuals by “race, ethnicity, color or national origin” and using the data in state hiring, contracting and public education. The Initiative notes two exemptions: (1) data collected in compliance with federal programs or to receive federal funding, and (2) data collected by law enforcement (permitting racial profiling).

A coalition of groups (the “Coalition for an Informed California”) is organizing to defeat Connerly’s Initiative, citing such unintended consequences of being denied the ability to collect data on diseases that appear only or primarily in certain ethnic and/or racial groups. Efforts to provide evidence of disparities in public policy would also be hampered. Social scientists would be unable to document equity in funding of certain scholarship programs, for example, if they were unable to collect data by race, ethnicity or gender.

According to CalPeek, the Coalition has filed two complaints with the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) in an effort to force Connerly to disclose the names of individuals who contributed to his effort to qualify the Initiative. No response as yet.

3. The nation’s unemployment rate rose to six percent in April, reflecting cutbacks in the airline industry, and in manufacturing and retail jobs. According to U.S. Secretary of Labor Elaine L. Chao, the unemployment rate rose two-tenths of a percent over March, or 48,000 jobs. The economy has lost more than a half million jobs over the past three months, with the number of unemployed workers rising to 8.8 million. Of this number, nearly two million people have been jobless for 27 weeks or more.

4. House approves the reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilitis Education Act (IDEA), H.R. 1350. The legislation, which was approved on a vote of 251 - 171, does not alter the existing formula for distributing money. (Funds currently are first distributed based on each state’s FY 1999 funding level; allocations above that level are then based on 85% of the eligible population between the ages of 3 - 21, and the remaining 15% on child poverty.)

The bill does propose changes in other areas:

· Reduces the number of students who are misidentified as disabled by offering earlier help for students with learning problems;

· Reduces the amount of paperwork required for educators; and

· Allows schools to expel or suspend special education students without determining whether their behavior was linked to their disability. (Not surprisingly, this provision was hotly debated by advocacy groups who adamantly opposed the proposal and by schools administrators who strongly supported it in order to have more control over the students.)

Capitol Hill Bulletin reported that several amendments were proposed and defeated before the bill was passed and sent forward to the Senate:

· One unsuccessful amendment sought to change the funding from annual appropriation to fixed entitlement. If it had been adopted, this amendment would have enabled a gradual increase in the federal government’s share of funding from 18% to 40%. According to Capitol Hill Bulletin, Republicans opposed the amendment in part because it would nullify periodic reauthorization of the Act and thus the requirement that Congress regularly assess the program and its efficiency.

· Another would have permitted the use of federal funds for disabled children to attend private schools.

· A third would have provided about $1,400 for disabled children enrolled in private schools to obtain additional services.

However, the bill does permit parents of special education students who attend low-performing schools to use federal special education money to pay for private tutoring.

Capitol Hill Bulletin reported on one successful amendment, coauthored by two California Representatives, Howard “Buck” McKeon (R - Santa Clarita) and Lynn Woolsey (D - Santa Rosa): The amendment requires that money allocated to a state be given directly to the school districts rather than to the state itself, to ward against the money being diverted to cover state budget deficits. (California was not the only state lawmakers had in mind. Kansas, Iowa and Oregon were also noted as states contemplating diverting IDEA funds.)

* NEW LEGISLATION OF INTEREST *
Note: Bills must be in print for 30 days before they can be heard by a committee.

ACR 95 (Dymally) Year of the Blues

This Assembly Concurrent Resolution designates the year beginning February 1, 2003, as the Year of the Blues and requests the Governor to issue a proclamation calling on the people of the state to observe the Year of the Blues.

The Resolution notes that the 107^th Congress [last year] also designated the year beginning February 1, 2003, as the Year of the Blues, observing the importance of educating “the young people of the United States to understand that the music that they listen to today has its roots and traditions in the Blues.”

The year 2003 is the centennial anniversary of when W.C. Handy, considered the “Father of the Blues,” heard the Blues for the first time in a train station in Mississippi--a fact noted in both the state and federal resolutions.

Introduced: April 23, 2003

* STATUS OF PREVIOUSLY INTRODUCED LEGISLATION *

AB 153 (Calderon) Student Financial Aid: Eligibility

In 2001 the Legislature proposed and the Governor approved AB 540, which, under certain conditions, exempted undocumented alien students from paying nonresident tuition at the University of California, California State University, and California Community Colleges.

To qualify, the students must have attended high school in California for 3 or more years, graduated from a California high school (or the equivalent), registered at or attended an accredited institution of higher education in California not earlier than the fall semester/quarter of the 2001-02 academic year, and must file an affidavit with the higher education institution stating they have filed an application to legalize their immigration status. Under AB 540, these students were not eligible for financial aid, including federal and state aid or work-study.

AB 153 would make these students eligible to apply for, and participate in, all student aid programs.

An April 24 amendment closes a “504 loophole,” to eliminate an unintended consequence. Because of federal restrictions and the strategy to provide in-state tuition to undocumented students based on high school attendance, AB 540 has qualified students who are not immigrants but also not California residents for in-state tuition. So long as a student attended a California high school for three years and graduated from a California high school, he or she is eligible under AB 540. That provision has created a loophole for non-California residents to receive tuition breaks. Because AB 153 is based on AB 540, those same non-California residents would be eligible for state-provided financial aid. As amended on April 24, the bill attempts to close this loophole and prevent these students from receiving state financial aid until undocumented students are eligible under federal law to receive financial aid.

Status: PASSED [7 - 4] by the Assembly Higher Education Committee and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, April 22.

AB 491 (Diaz) California State University: Adequate Funding

As initially introduced, AB 491 was a “spot bill,” a placeholder for content to be added later. The content, amended into the bill on April 22, relates to the recent CMS Audit Report, which was critical of the way in which the CSU system acquired and implemented a comprehensive information management technology system linking all 23 campuses and the Chancellor’s Office together.

The bill essentially does four things:

· Requires any information technology project exceeding $100,000 to receive independent oversight and prior approval from the Director of Finance;

· Requires the Trustees to establish quantitative measures of increased business process efficiencies for information technology projects, and requires that before a contract can be entered into, the CSU must provide an analysis of the relative merits and projected costs;

· Requires the CSU to take prescribed actions to safeguard electronic records that contain confidential student information; and

Status: PASSED [6 - 2] by the Assembly Higher Education Committee and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, April 28. [Note: The vote on this bill was interesting: Of the 6 Ayes, one Republican and 5 Democrats supported the bill, with three of the Ayes describing their action as a “courtesy vote.” One Republican and 5 Democrats supported the bill. One Republican and one Democrat cast the No votes. Two members of the Committee were present, but decided not to vote, and one member was absent.

AB 491 is one of two bills addressing CMS Audit issues. The other bill, SB 971, reported below, is the CSU’s response to problems identified in the Audit.]

AB 550 (Diaz) Public Postsecondary Education: Student Fee Policy

As initially written, this bill provided that the UC Regents and CSU Trustees should bear the primary responsibility for adjusting mandatory systemwide resident student fees at their respective systems. The bill would have required both systems to develop methodologies for the adjustment of fees in accordance with certain principles, chief among which is that resident student fees should be gradual, moderate and predictable, and imposed with adequate notice.

The bill also stated that as changes in resident student fees and financial aid resources are considered, the state should have an understanding of the impact on both current and prospective students, and employ efforts to mitigate any negative effect on financially needy students.

As amended on April 21, the requirement that both UC and CSU develop methodologies for the adjustment of fees was deleted. The bill now seeks to require the CSU and the California Community Colleges, and request the UC, to establish a Systemwide Student Fee Advisory Committee (SSFAC) in each of their respective systems. [In the case of the CSU, the SSFAC would be an official standing committee of the Board of Trustees.] The bill prescribes the membership of these committees and requires them to conduct public hearings regarding proposed student fee increases.

As initially written, the bill also authorized the CSU and UC to approve mandatory systemwide student fee increases for their respective systems--but only with the prior approval of the appropriate Student Fee Advisory Committee. As amended on April 21, the requirement for prior approval by this committee was deleted (since the SSFAC would now take its place). Similarly, as amended on April 24, the bill deletes a requirement to establish a consistent fee policy in consultation with students and an advisory vote of students when fee increases are considered. Another April 24 amendment adds two additional members to the 11-member Systemwide Student Fee Advisory Committee.

Finally, the bill would direct the SSFAC to develop and implement a process requiring that any alternative funding for that segment be considered and exhausted before consideration of a student fee increase.

Status: PASSED [8 - 0] by the Assembly Higher Education Committee and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, April 28.

AB 618 (Levine) Vehicles: Special License Plates

This bill seeks to establish a special license plate program for collegiate sports organizations and professional sports teams. It would require the funds derived under the program to be deposited in the Title IX Compliance Account, which the bill would establish in the General Fund.

As amended on April 28, the bill now specifies that the money appropriated from the Title IX Compliance Account be “for the purpose of promoting women’s participation in high school and collegiate sports.”

Status: PASSED [19 - 0] by the Assembly Transportation Committee and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, April 21.

AB 791 (Pavley) Commission on Teacher Credentialing

This bill seeks to require the Legislative Analyst to conduct a study to review the success of the Commission on Teacher Credentialing in performing its assigned functions and to assess the feasibility of merging the commission with the State Department of Education.

Status: PASSED [7 - 2] by the Assembly Education Committee and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, April 23. [Note: The vote was cast along partisan lines, with Democrats supporting and Republicans opposing the bill. Republicans sided with the California Federation of Teachers in supporting the study, and agreed with the CFT that the merger ought not take place without seeing the result of the analysis first.]

AB 825 (Firebaugh) Community College Transfers: Student Financial Aid TRUSTEE BILL

As initially written, this bill sought to make a number of changes to the Cal Grant Community College Transfer Program designed to enhance access to the program for students. Specifically, the bill sought to:

· Remove the age restriction for the transfer entitlement. The current structure of the program essentially makes it accessible only to students below the age of 24, which disenfranchises a large number of students who desire to attend the CSU.

· Reduce the minimum community college grade point average (GPA) required for receipt of a transfer entitlement award from 2.4 to 2.0. This change conforms the GPA requirement to that which is required for admission to the CSU.

· Remove the requirement that, for a community college transfer entitlement award, a student had to have graduated from a California high school or its equivalent during or after the 2000-01 academic year.

As amended on April 21, the bill eliminates all of the above and instead expresses a finding by the Legislature that the current Cal Grant Competitive Program should be modified to ensure that it clearly addresses the unique needs of older, adult, nontraditional, returning, and reentry students; and that the current program structure should be modified to ensure that the needs of students pursuing vocational and technical education programs are adequately being met.

The bill also now “expresses legislative intent that the Student Aid Commission convene a group of interested parties to prepare a study regarding the extent to which the current Cal Grant programs adequately address the needs of California residents who seek to pursue a postsecondary education.”

Status: PASSED [11 - 0] by the Assembly Higher Education Committee and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, May 6.

AB 858 (Goldberg) Athletic Team Names and Mascots

As amended on April 10, the bill deletes reference to Jerry Ballesteros and instead names the proposed law the California Racial Mascots Act.

[Note: AB 858 is essentially a reintroduction of AB 2115, introduced last year by Assembly Member Goldberg. That bill failed passage on a vote of 29 - 35 in the state Assembly. The vote was 12 shy of the 41-vote majority she needed to advance her bill to the Senate.]

Status: PASSED [6 - 4] by the Assembly Education Committee, and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, April 23. [Note: Despite the numbers, the vote was not cast along partisan lines.]

AB 907 (Pavley) Environmental Education

This bill would require the State Board of Education to revise the academic content and performance standards for language arts, history/social science, and science to incorporate environmental education content and performance standards. It would also require the revisions to occur within the timeframes and procedures set forth in the State Department of Education’s schedule for curriculum framework development.

The bill calls for extensive consultation with interested stakeholders. Implementation of these particular provisions in the bill would be subject to funds being made available in the annual Budget Act or other legislation.

Status: PASSED [8 - 3] by the Assembly Education Committee and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, April 23. [Note: The vote was cast along partisan lines, with Democrats supporting and Republicans opposing the bill.]

AB 1219 (Montanez) Inmate Education

Status: PASSED [8 - 3] by the Assembly Education Committee and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, April 30, where it will be heard on May 14. [Note: The vote was cast along partisan lines, with Democrats supporting and Republicans opposing the bill.]

AB 1778 (Committee on Higher Educ.) CSU: Omnibus Bill TRUSTEE BILL

As initially written, the following proposals were included in the legislation:

None of the above proposals should result in a fiscal impact--cost or savings--to the CSU or the state.

Status: PASSED [24 - 0] by the Assembly Appropriations Committee, May 7, and put on the Assembly CONSENT Calendar [for non-controversial bills].

SB 40 (Alpert) Reading, Literacy and Public Library Bond Act

Enacts the California Reading and Literacy Improvement and Public Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act of 2004, for submission to voters at the 2004 Primary Election (March 2).

If approved by voters, this bill would authorize the issuance of $2 billion in general obligation bonds for the purpose of financing library construction and renovation pursuant to a program administered by the State Librarian.

As initially written, joint-use projects with one or more school districts that serve K-12 pupils, were authorized for funding. As amended on March 24, the bill now includes a county office of education, a community college district, and a campus of the California State University or the University of California as additional authorized joint-use partners.

The bill contains an Urgency Clause, which means it would take effect immediately upon the Governor’s signature (rather than on January 1, 2004).

Status: PASSED [11 - 0] by the Senate Education Committee and referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee, April 23.

SB 74 (Torlakson) State Property: Vending Machines

This bill seeks to require each vendor that operates or maintains a vending machine on designated state property to satisfy the requirement that at least 50% of the food and beverages offered at the vending machine meets the accepted nutritional guidelines, as defined.

“State property” is defined as including the California State University.

Status: FAILED PASSAGE [6 - 5] in the Senate Governmental Organization Committee, April 29. The author successfully sought a rule waiver to permit reconsideration, but no re-hearing date has been established yet.

SB 193 (Murray) Student Athlete Rights

As initially introduced, this bill stated the intention of the Legislature to enact legislation regarding the rights of student athletes at postsecondary educational institutions.

On April 24, the bill was amended to enact the Student Athletes’ Bill of Rights, which, in essence, removes NCAA authority over California student athletes.

The bill also entitles student athletes to workers’ compensation benefits, and requires higher education institutions to report annually to the California Postsecondary Education Commission the following information:

· the average and median college entrance exam scores for student athletes admitted to that institution that year;

· the average and median grade point averages for student athletes;

· the graduate rates for student athletes; and

· the major course of study of each student athlete.

Status: PASSED [8 - 0] by the Senate Education Committee and referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee, April 30.

SB 279 (Chesbro) Student Fee Waivers - Extension of Sunset Date

As initially written, in a bill authored by Senator Chesbro in 1999, the law is scheduled to sunset on January 1, 2004. This bill would extend the benefit indefinitely.

[Note: The impetus for this bill is rooted in a situation that developed in 1999 at Humboldt State University. Calder Johnson, an entering freshman, enrolled with the understanding that his tuition and fees would be waived, since he was the son of a man who was killed while fighting wildfires in Humboldt County in 1987. However, because the elder Johnson was a civilian pilot working under contract for the Department of Forestry, and was not a public employee, his son was ineligible for the waivers.

Without the waivers, the son could not afford to pursue his college education and his ultimate goal of becoming a doctor. The press got wind of the story, and it was featured in every major newspaper in the state. In the resulting outcry, a local family in Humboldt stepped forward and provided the son with money from its family trust to support his education while he was enrolled at Humboldt State.

Senator Wes Chesbro (R - Humboldt) subsequently introduced a bill to extend the spirit of the law to the letter of the law, thus preventing situations similar to Calder Johnson’s from developing in the future. In order to ensure passage of that first bill, however, he had to insert a sunset date--which the Senator’s current bill seeks now to delete.]

Status: PASSED [12 - 0] by the Senate Education Committee, April 2; FAILED PASSAGE [0 - 1] in the Senate Appropriations Committee, April 28. The author requested reconsideration, which was granted, but no re-hearing date has been set yet.

SB 383 (Alarcon) College Preparatory Commission

As amended on April 21, this bill would establish a Postsecondary Readiness Commission, whose 13 members would be appointed by the Governor, the Senate Rules Committee, and the Speaker of the Assembly. [Note: Among the specified appointments to be made by the Governor would be a representative from the University of California. The representative from the CSU would be among the appointments made by the Senate Rules Committee, and the representative from the California Community College system would among those made by the Assembly Speaker.]

Finally, the bill, as amended, provides for a January 1, 2007 sunset date.

Status: PASSED [9 - 2] by the Senate Education Committee and referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee, April 30. [Note: The vote was cast along partisan lines, with Democrats supporting and Republicans opposing the bill.]

SB 971 (Burton) CSU: Outside Employment TRUSTEE BILL

As initially written, this bill would require executive, Management Personnel Plan (MPP), and academic employees to report on outside employment and business activities to ensure that such activities do not constitute a conflict of interest with CSU employment or conflict with normal work assignments or the performance of duties.

As amended on April 23, the bill would also prohibit an employee of the CSU from being a consultant or an employee of a for-profit business entity that provides services to the university. It would additionally require the CSU to offer ethics training to each employee who is required to file a Statement of Economic Interests in accordance with current law.

Status: PASSED [7 - 2] by the Senate Education Committee and referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee, April 30. [Note: The April 23 amendments were sought by CSU, in consultation with the bill’s author, in an effort to address problems identified in the recent CMS audit. See AB 491 above for an alternative approach.

The vote on the bill was not cast along partisan lines. Of the 7 members voting Aye, 5 are Democrats and 2 are Republicans. The two No votes were both cast by Democrats.]

Return to Archive List

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

4/24/2003

CAPITOL NEWS

1. Philip Morris’ appeal bond is reduced. In the last issue of Legislative Update, it was reported that Philip Morris had lost the case in which it had been accused of misleading smokers by advertising that “light” cigarettes were less harmful than the regular kind. [That item contained multiple typographical errors--which have been corrected in the web edition. My apologies for the lapse in quality control.] Damages were set at $10.1 billion, and Madison County Circuit Judge Nicholas G. Byron ordered the company to post a $12 billion bond to cover the award plus interest while it appealed the Judge’s ruling. The magnitude of the bond led Philip Morris to declare it would be unable to meet its net $2.6 billion payment to the states, due on April 15.

Last week Judge Byron lowered the amount of the bond (but not the award) to $6.8 billion. The company will now be able to meet its annual obligation to the states.

2. U.S. Senator John Edwards (D - North Carolina) introduces bill benefiting soldiers called to active duty. Current law, which applies to all students with federal student loans, provides that interest will accrue on loans, with no exceptions. S. 863, the Fairness for America’s Soldiers in Higher Education Act of 2003, which was introduced on April 10, with 6 co-sponsors (all Democrats, with one exception: Senator James Jeffords, I -Vermont; and none from California), would amend current law in two ways: (1) A student who withdraws from an institution of higher education in order to serve on active duty during a war or national emergency, would not be required to repay his/her student loan; and (2) students who are on active duty deferment will have the interest on their loans waived.

3. Legislators return to the Capitol following Spring Break. Lawmakers began work this week on a backlog of bills that had accumulated during the two-week freeze [prior to the Spring Break] placed on policy committees by Senate and Assembly leadership in order to allow legislators to focus on the budget crisis. Although the leadership had specified that any bill carrying a price tag greater than $100,000 would be sent to Assembly and Senate Suspense Files until after the May Revise, most bills went forward to the Appropriations Committees anyway.

The report on Legislation already introduced, below, is thus longer than usual.

The May Revise refers to the update of revenues and expenditures, released by the Department of Finance, which replaces estimates contained in the Governor’s January Budget.

* STATUS OF PREVIOUSLY INTRODUCED LEGISLATION *

AB 242 (Liu) Teachers

This bill seeks to enact several recommendations relating primarily to teacher personnel matters, contained in the Joint Legislative Committee on Developing a K - University Master Plan, delivered to the Legislature in August 2002. With a goal of ensuring that every student in the state is taught by a qualified, credentialed teacher, the bill would:

· Provide financial aid and other incentives for the best teachers to move to low-performing schools;

· Boost salaries for teachers and principals;

· Eliminate emergency teaching permits;

· Establish career opportunities that encourage exceptional teachers to remain in the classroom;

· Provide salary credits tied to professional development goals; and

· Develop rigorous standards and training for those who teach young children.

The bill also contains provisions relating to professional preparation for educators and childcare personnel. With respect to public higher education, the bill provides, among other things, that the governing boards of the UC, CSU and California Community Colleges adopt policies regarding the appropriate balance of temporary and permanent tenure-track faculty.

[The full text of the bill can be read on the Senate website: http://www.sen.ca.gov

Click on “legislation,” and on the next screen type in the bill number.]

Status: PASSED [7 - 4] by the Assembly Higher Education Committee and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, April 22.

[Note: The vote was cast along partisan lines, with Democrats favoring and Republicans opposing the bill, as was the case in the Assembly Education Committee on April 2. The California Federation of Teachers is opposed to provisions in the bill that seek to create a statewide health and welfare benefits schedule for all K-12 employees, effectively removing these benefits from the purview of collective bargaining.

Other concerns expressed about the bill center on the proposed elimination of the pre-intern programs by 2010. The Commission on Teacher Credentialing (CTC) is a strong supporter of pre-intern programs as a viable alternative to the emergency teaching permits--which AB 242 would also eliminate. The CTC is also concerned about how school districts will fill teaching positions in emergency situations, if emergency credentials and waivers of provisions governing the preparation or licensing of educators are eliminated.]

AB 307 (Maddox) Cal Grant National Guard Awards

This bill would establish the Cal Grant National Guard Award Program. It would require that, commencing with the 2004-05 academic year, Cal Grant NG awards would be made to qualifying members of the Army National Guard and the Air National Guard for full-time study or student loan repayment in an amount equivalent to the sum of the annual educational fee and annual registration fee charged to California resident undergraduate students at the University of California.

Status: PASSED [6 - 0] by the Assembly Higher Education Committee and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, April 22.

AB 554 (Daucher) Community Colleges: Nonresident Student Tuition Fees

Existing law requires that the California Community Colleges deposit 98% of the student fee revenue collected into the state General Fund (keeping 2% to cover the administrative costs associated with collecting the fee).

This bill would delete this requirement and instead establish the Community Colleges Instructional Augmentation fund, into which the student fee revenue would be deposited. The revenue would be continuously appropriated by the chancellor of the community college system, to each community college district in the state on an equal basis per FTE student. The money would be used “to supplement and enrich instructional and instructionally related services, and financial aid services to students.”

Status: PASSED [11 - 0] by the Assembly Higher Education Committee, and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, April 22.

AB 593 (Ridley-Thomas) Voter Registration

Status: PASSED [5 - 2] by the Assembly Elections, Redistricting & Constitutional Amendments Committee, and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, April 22. [Note: The vote was cast along partisan lines, with Democrats supporting and Republicans opposing the bill.]

AB 680 (Liu) Community College Fees

As currently written, this bill seeks to establish a schedule of fees for community college students that provides for a gradual increase in fees charged to all students:

· For the 2003-04 academic year (terms beginning after January 1, 2004), students would pay $16 per unit per semester;

· For the 2004-05 academic year, $21 per unit per semester; and

· For the 2005-06 academic year, $25 per unit per semester.

Currently, community college districts may retain only 2% of the student fee revenue collected, for use in covering the administrative costs to collect it. This bill would create the Community Colleges Instructional and Student Services Augmentation Fund, and require that a portion of the student fee revenue be deposited into it. The revenue would be continuously appropriated by the chancellor of the community college system, to each community college district in the state on an equal basis per FTE student. The money would be used “to supplement and enrich instructional and instructionally related services, and financial aid services to students.”

The bill also provides that CSU or UC students who are enrolled in remedial classes provided by a community college district would be exempt from paying these fees, pursuant to an agreement between the district and the CSU or UC.

Status: PASSED [6 - 3] by the Assembly Higher Education Committee, and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, April 22. [Note: The vote was cast along partisan lines, with Democrats supporting, and Republicans opposing to the bill.]

AB 705 (Corbett) Career Technical Education

This bill seeks to implement one of the recommendations contained in the report of the Joint Committee to Develop a Master Plan for K - University Education [#24], that “the state should provide age-appropriate career curriculum and guidance for all students to prepare them to transition successfully from school to employment.”

Status: PASSED [11 - 0] by the Assembly Higher Education Committee and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, April 22.

AB 833 (Steinberg) Gender Equity in Athletics

As initially written, this bill stated the intent of the Legislature to strengthen California law requiring gender equity in athletics. As amended on April 3, the bill now expresses various findings and declarations of the Legislature with respect to gender equity in athletics. It states that “full compliance with Title IX is nondiscretionary,” and sets forth standards by which to determine whether an educational institution has effectively accommodated the interests and abilities of both sexes in athletics.

The bill would prohibit the use of public funds in connection with an athletic program of a public postsecondary education institution that does not provide equivalent opportunity to both sexes for participation and use of facilities.

Status: PASSED [11 - 0] by the Assembly Higher Education Committee and referred to the Assembly Education Committee, April 22.

AB 1010 (Yee) Student Financial Aid: Loan Forgiveness

As initially introduced, this bill sought to establish the Loan Forgiveness for Teachers of Blind and Visually Impaired Pupils Program under the administration of the Chancellor of the CSU. The bill required a program participant to agree to teach blind or visually impaired pupils in a California public elementary or secondary school on a full-time basis for at least 4 school years.

As amended on April 10, the bill instead provides that, effective January 1, 2004, teachers for blind or visually disabled pupils will be eligible to participate in the Assumption Program of Loans for Education, administered by the Student Aid Commission.

Status: PASSED [11 - 0] by the Assembly Higher Education Committee, and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, April 22.

AB 1144 (Pavley) CSU: Employees

This bill would provide CSU employees who are appealing notices of adverse actions, and university employees with disabilities who are challenging denials of requests for reasonable accommodations, with procedural rights that are similar to those granted to state civil service employees.

Status: PASSED [7 - 4] by the Assembly Higher Education Committee and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, April 22. [Note: The vote was cast along partisan lines, with Democrats supporting and Republicans opposing the bill.]

AB 1185 (Montanez) CSU: Administrative Costs

· A detailed analysis of the administrative costs incurred in the previous fiscal year;

· The percentage of general purpose funds devoted to administrative costs in the previous fiscal year; and

· The percent increase or decrease in total administrative costs from the year prior to the previous fiscal year.

The bill requires that these annual reports be prepared within existing resources by the system and the campuses.

· Car and housing allowances

· Travel

· Supplies and equipment

· Leases

· Computing support

· Contractual services

· Public relations and communications

· Information technology

· Consulting fees

· Conference, training and seminar attendance.

AB 1465 (McLeod) CSU: Continuing Education

· Certificate programs

· Off-campus degrees

· Corporate training

· Online programs and degrees

· Special emphasis programs

· Professional development

· Test preparation.

[Note: Continuing education programs are self-supporting, and are not funded by General Fund dollars.]

Status: PASSED [7 - 1] by the Assembly Higher Education Committee and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, April 22. [Note: Assembly Member Alan Nakanishi (R - Lodi) cast the sole dissenting vote.]

AB 1550 (Goldberg) Standards for New School Facilities

This bill would implement one of the recommendations in the Joint Master Plan for K - University Education. It would require the Department of General Services (1) to adopt regulations establishing standards for new facilities, including, but not limited to, early childhood education and postsecondary education facilities; and (2) to establish and maintain an inventory of all available public educational facilities.

The bill would additionally require the Legislative Analyst and the Director of Finance to jointly develop a plan for the construction of facilities for all sectors of public higher education.

Status: PASSED [7 - 4] by the Assembly Higher Education Committee and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee on April 22. [Note: The vote was cast along partisan lines, with Democrats supporting and Republicans opposing the bill.]

AB 1778 (Committee on Higher Educ.) CSU: Omnibus Bill TRUSTEE BILL

As initially written, the following proposals were included in the legislation:

· Amend Government Code Section to Include CSU Peace Officers. This proposal would add CSU peace officers to a prohibition against posting of the home address or telephone number of public safety officers and their family members on the Internet in a threatening manner or with intent to cause them harm.

None of the above proposals should result in a fiscal impact--cost or savings--to the CSU or the state.

As amended on April 21, the proposed Government Code amendment relating to CSU Peace Officers was deleted. [Note: Because there is a task force studying the issue, it was requested that CSU remove the proposed amendment from the bill pending the results of the task force report which is due in September.]

Status: PASSED [11 - 0] by the Higher Education Committee and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee on April 22.

SB 231 (Murray) Genetic Services Advisory Committee

This bill seeks to require the Director of Health Services to appoint a Genetic Services Advisory Committee with an unspecified number of members, consisting of the following:

· One or more individuals affected by a genetic disorder or parents of such individuals;

· Advocates for women and childbirth issues;

· Health care providers specializing in clinical genetics, pediatrics, obstetrics, molecular biology, cytogenetics, and biochemical genetics;

· Representatives of hospital administration, genetic counseling, the insurance industry; and the biotechnology industry; and

· Professional organizations representing physicians and registered nurses.

The committee would meet at least annually and review genetic services programs conducted under the Hereditary Disorders Act, and would be required to report to the Legislature and Governor annually on or before October 30, with respect to all of the following:

· The availability and utilization of genetic services;

· The quality of services provided;

· The cost and funding of services; and

· The need to discontinue or add additional services or improve the quality, quantity, and distribution of services or provider reimbursement.

As initially written, the bill provided that the activities of the committee be supported by fees in the Genetic Disease Testing Fund, and also specified that the Committee staff include at least one full-time position. Funding for the position would be supported by a 25-cent increase in the above referenced fees, commencing January 1, 2004.

As amended on April 9, those provisions relating to support from fees in the Genetic Disease Testing Fund, and to support of the full-time position by the increase in these fees were deleted. The bill instead authorizes the committee to apply for and receive federal and private funding to fund its activities. The bill also provides that the committee “shall operate exclusively from these funds, and shall only operate to the extent these funds are available.”

STATUS: PASSED [12 - 0] by the Senate Committee on Health and Human Services, and referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee, April 23.

Return to Archive List

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

April 11, 2003

CAPITOL NEWS

1. House Committee approves reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) this week. The House Education and Workforce Committee approved H.R. 1350, which seeks to reauthorize the current Act, set to expire on September 30, 2003. The Senate will not likely begin work on the bill until early summer, and thus the conference committee appointed to resolve differences between the two houses won’t begin its work until late summer.

The bill, as approved, does not significantly change the funding formulas established by Congress in 1997. It does, however, address the level of funding which a bipartisan group of lawmakers has been striving to increase for the last several years. Currently, states are provided about 18% of the cost for federally required special education services, an increase of about 8% over the past several years. As is true with many government programs, the federal government’s contributions have not increased as rapidly as the requirements to provide more services. Lawmakers supporting a higher level of funding would like to see the amount increased to 40%, believing that anything less is tantamount to an “unfunded mandate” on the states.

As reported in California Capitol Hill Bulletin, H.R. 1350, if enacted and funding is appropriated, would provide an increase of $2.2 billion in FY2004 and $2.7 billion in FY2005--which would raise the federal level of contributions to 21% of the nation’s disabled education expenditures. The bill provides for additional increases to reach the 40% level within seven years.

The Bulletin reports that total funding in FY2003 will be $8.9 billion, educating 6.5 million disabled children across the country. California’s share of this money is about 10%.

2. Rep. Howard Berman (D - Panorama City) and Lucille Roybal-Allard (D - Los Angeles) have introduced H.R. 1918, to amend the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. The measure, which is co-sponsored by Reps. Linda Sanchez (D - Lakewood) and Hilda Solis (D - El Monte), seeks to allow undocumented students to pay resident, rather than the significantly higher non-resident, rates. The 1996 immigration reform law bars states from offering in-state tuition rates to undocumented students unless they also offer it to citizens and legal residents from other states. The law has never been enforced, but it has been recently challenged by three states--California, Texas and Utah.

Two years ago Governor Davis approved AB 540 (Firebaugh - D, Los Angeles), which allows undocumented students to pay in-state tuition rates at 2- and 4-year California colleges and universities. AB 540 applies only to students who have attended a California high school for 3 or more years and graduated; and who file an affidavit with the college or university stating that they have filed, or will file, for legal status. These students also are not currently eligible to receive financial aid, although there is a bill pending in the state legislature (AB 153 - Calderon, D - Montebello) that would grant them eligibility.

Berman, Roybal-Allard, and Republican Chris Cannon authored legislation similar to H.R. 1918 last year, but it failed to win passage. The new measure has stronger bipartisan support, according to Berman, including solid endorsement from Rep. David Dreier (R - Glendora), who chairs the California Republican Congressional Delegation.

3. California is not the biggest pig at the trough. Citizens Against Government Waste released its 2003 edition of The Pig Book this week. The annual publication details all of the special earmarks--“pork-barrel” projects-- inserted into the federal appropriations bills by Members of Congress on behalf of their districts. The report identified $22.5 billion of pork in the 13 FY2003 appropriations bills. The total sets a new record, exceeding FY2002’s total pork by $2.4 billion, or 12%. The report cites that projects are up by 12% as well, from 8,341 to 9,362. The total increase over the past five years is a whopping 337%. The Pig Book has been published annually since 1991.

The good news--or the bad news, depending on one’s point of view--is that California’s 2002 ranking is 41^st among the states, 6 slots below its 2001 ranking. The states with the most pork are Alaska, Hawaii and West Virginia, reflecting the clout of their respective Senators: Ted Stevens (R - Alaska), who chairs the Senate Appropriations Committee, Daniel Inouye (D - Hawaii), a long-standing member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, and Robert Byrd (D - West Virginia), the Ranking Minority Member of the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Special project requests don’t always equate to “pork barrel,” although the definition, like beauty, may be in the eye of the beholder. CSUN had two requests for special earmarks in the FY2003 Omnibus Appropriations bill, one of which was partially funded. The University received $400,000 (40% of the amount requested) for high technology equipment to support the development and implementation of a new entertainment-engineering curriculum. The money was provided to the University through a FIPSE grant [Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education].

The University is pursuing two requests for special earmarks in the FY2004 Appropriations cycle. One project seeks $1 million in specially designed equipment for the Abbott and Linda Brown Western Center for Adaptive Aquatic Therapy, which was officially opened on March 28. The second request, for $980,000, would fund the South Campus Walkway Improvement Project, which addresses serious flooding problems and safety hazards surrounding a heavily used walkway near the University’s largest classroom facility.

4. Just when you thought the state’s fiscal picture couldn’t get worse. Philip Morris has put states on notice that it might not be able to make its next $2.6 billion payment, due on April 15. The company lost a court case in March alleging it had misled smokers by advertising that “light” cigarettes were less harmful than regular smokes. The judge ordered Philip Morris to post a $12 billion bond, while it appealed the ruling.

StateNet Capitol Journal, commenting on the obvious, reported “The company’s announcement is particularly confounding to officials in states such as California and Virginia who are planning to sell tobacco bonds backed by future payments from tobacco companies.”

5. Community College Chancellor steps down. Thomas Nussbaum, chancellor of the California Community Colleges, announced this week that he is retiring at the end of this year after seven years in the position, and 27 years with the community college system. Nussbaum, 55, served as General Counsel and Vice Chancellor of Legal Affairs before being appointed Chancellor in 1996.

Nussbaum’s successor will have to deal with huge budget cuts--larger in percentage than those proposed in the Governor’s Budget for the UC and the CSU--and the same urgent enrollment pressures facing the CSU. In announcing his retirement, Nussbaum indicated he would focus most of his remaining time in office lobbying the Legislature against the size of the reductions and the proposed student fee increases. Unlike the UC and the CSU, the community colleges retain only 2% of the student fee revenue they collect. The 2% is used to cover the costs of administering the fee; the balance of the revenue goes into the state General Fund. [Note: Two bills seek to change this policy. See AB 554 and AB 680 below.]

6. Mike Dayton, former legislative director to former Rep. Gary Condit (D - Modesto) has landed a new job. Governor Davis has appointed Dayton special adviser to the state Department of Homeland Security. The position, which pays $90,000 a year, will have responsibility for identifying federal homeland security grants for the state, local governments and technology companies.

Dayton enjoyed a dubious 15 minutes of fame in 2001when he drove Condit to a dumpster to dispose of a watch case a few hours before police arrived to search Condit’s apartment.

The Congressional Quarterly quotes Steve Maviglio, Governor Davis’ Press Secretary, “Dayton was chosen because of his experience navigating the federal appropriations process. He knows how to get money, and that’s what we need.”

7. CSUN design students could have done it for less. StateNet Capitol Journal reports that Maryland has unveiled a new tamper-proof driver’s license, which has the look of a credit card. The design cost $40 million and took three years to create. (And folks say that California is nuts.)

* NEW LEGISLATION OF INTEREST *
Note: Bills must be in print for 30 days before they can be heard by a committee.

AB 1783 (Assm. Higher Educ. Com.) Public Postsecondary Education: Cross-Enrollment

A provision of the Donahoe Higher Education Act, which is in effect until January 1, 2004, authorizes any student who is enrolled at any campus of the California Community Colleges, the CSU or the UC, and who meets certain requirements, to enroll without formal admission into another of these institutions in a maximum of one course per academic term, on a space available basis, at the discretion of the appropriate campus authorities.

This bill would remove the sunshine date, thereby extending the program indefinitely.

Introduced: April 10, 2003

ACR 86 (Maze) Higher Education in the 34^th District

This Assembly Concurrent Resolution makes a Legislation declaration of the need to study whether a four-year university should be located in the 34^th Assembly District. The measure resolves that the UC and the CSU should jointly undertake a study to determine where to locate a campus or satellite campus in Tulare, Kings, Kern, or Fresno County, in order to increase access to residents of those counties to attaining a baccalaureate degree.

[Note: The 34^th Assembly District, which Assembly Member Maze represents, encompasses parts of Tulare, Inyo, Kern and San Bernardino Counties. The UC is currently developing a University in Merced, which abuts Fresno County, and is located northwest of the 34^th District.]

Introduced: April 7, 2003

* STATUS OF PREVIOUSLY INTRODUCED LEGISLATION *

AB 56 (Liu) K - University Master Plan: Child Care, Development and Education

Among other things, AB 56 seeks to make full-day kindergarten compulsory, set up a system of voluntary state-funded preschools, and establish the School Readiness Program to provide grants to applicant agencies to improve a young child’s readiness for school and to improve a school’s readiness for young children.

Current law mandates compulsory full-time education for children between the ages of 6 and 18; this bill would lower the minimum age to 5.

Status: PASSED [8 - 2] by the Assembly Education Committee on April 2 and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee on the same day.

[Note: The vote was cast along partisan lines, with Democrats supporting and Republicans opposing the bill. The Governor vetoed a similar bill last year, expressing concern that it would “unduly restrict a parent’s or guardian’s education choices for their children,” and that “parents should have the right to choose an education program for their 5-year-old children.”

Republican members of the Committee voiced the same concern about AB 56, and worried that some children could experience adverse effects from being forced into a formal education program too soon.

AB 56 is one of a series of bills seeking to implement recommendations in the K - University Master Plan, developed by a Joint Legislative Committee after three years of study, public hearings and discussion, and which were delivered in a report to the state Legislature last August. The bill has developed quite a lengthy list of both supporters and opponents.]

AB 60 (Dymally) CSU: African American Political Institute

Status: PASSED [10 - 0] by the Assembly Higher Education Committee on April 1, and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee on the same day.

[Note: Several amendments have since been made to this bill. As currently written, the bill restricts the CSU from spending more than $500,000 on the Institute, and specifies that the Institute be supported “with nonpublic funds or with other funds that CSU, Dominguez Hills is authorized to expend, and makes available, for this purpose.”

One amendment deletes the reference to the $500,000. Even though it is not an appropriation, there was concern that the language suggests an expectation of an appropriation--which, under current economic conditions, is not likely to be fulfilled.

A second amendment adds legislative intent that only private contributions and grants be used to support the Institute, and that no state funds be redirected by the campus to support it. “State funds” is defined rather broadly as including the state General Fund, Lottery, and student fee revenues.]

AB 242 (Liu) Teachers

· Provide financial aid and other incentives for the best teachers to move to low-performing schools;

· Boost salaries for teachers and principals;

· Eliminate emergency teaching permits;

· Establish career opportunities that encourage exceptional teachers to remain in the classroom;

· Provide salary credits tied to professional development goals; and

· Develop rigorous standards and training for those who teach young children.

[The full text of the bill can be read on the Senate website: http://www.sen.ca.gov
Click on “legislation,” and on the next screen type in the bill number.]

Status: PASSED [7 - 2] by the Assembly Education Committee and referred to the Assembly Higher Education Committee on April 2.

[Note: The vote was cast along partisan lines, with Democrats favoring and Republicans opposing the bill. The California Federation of Teachers is opposed to provisions in the bill that seek to create a statewide health and welfare benefits schedule for all K-12 employees, effectively removing these benefits from the purview of collective bargaining.

AB 554 (Daucher) Community Colleges: Nonresident Student Tuition Fees

This bill was originally introduced as a “spot” bill, with the content to be inserted at a later date. That content was amended into the bill on April 7:

Status: As amended, this bill will be heard on April 22 in the Assembly Higher Education Committee.

AB 680 (Liu) Community College Fees

As initially introduced, this bill sought to impose an additional $10 fee per unit on students with Bachelor’s degrees who enroll at community colleges.

As amended on March 24, the bill established a schedule of fees, differentiating between students with and without Bachelor’s degrees. As amended on April 10, the bill establishes a different schedule of fees that does not make this differentiation, but provides for a gradual increase in fees charged to all students:

· For the 2003-04 academic year (terms beginning after January 1, 2004), students would pay $16 per unit per semester;

· For the 2004-05 academic year, $21 per unit per semester; and

· For the 2005-06 academic year, $25 per unit per semester.

Currently, the community college districts may retain only 2% of the student fee revenue, with that money used to cover the administrative costs to collect it. As amended on March 24, the bill sought to exempt the fee increase revenue from this requirement for 2003-04. As amended on April 10, the bill instead establishes the Community Colleges Instructional and Student Services Augmentation Fund, and requires that a portion of the student fee revenue be deposited into it.

The revenue would be continuously appropriated by the chancellor of the community college system, to each community college district in the state on an equal basis per FTE student. The money would be used “to supplement and enrich instructional and instructionally related services, and financial aid services to students.”

CSU or UC students who are enrolled in remedial classes provided by a community college district would be exempt from paying these fees, pursuant to an agreement between the district and the CSU or UC.

Status: This bill, as amended on April 10, will be heard in the Assembly Higher Education Committee on April 22.

AB 843 (Assm. Higher Educ. Com.) Responsibility for Adjusting Student Fees

This bill seeks to amend the Donahoe Higher Education Act to provide that the UC Regents and the CSU Trustees bear the primary responsibility for adjusting mandatory systemwide resident student fees at their respective systems.

The bill would require the UC and CSU to develop methodologies for the adjustment of fees in accordance with principles and a prescribed procedure, which the bill sets forth. The impact and resulting outcome that the methodology [used in developing a proposal for increasing fees] will have on students and the quality of the system must be considered, and the systems must include a mitigation plan, in the event their methodology results in a negative impact.

Finally, the bill would require the California Postsecondary Education Commission to annually review and report to the Legislature and the Director of Finance about the policies and procedures adopted pursuant to this bill.

[Note: California does not currently have a policy in state statute that provides either direction or guidance about student fees. This bill seeks to provide such a policy, with the intent that student fees be “gradual, moderate, and predictable.”]

Status: PASSED [9 - 0] by the Assembly Higher Education Committee and referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee on April 1.

AB 908 (Chan) CSU: Disability Retirement

Existing law generally requires that, when a state employer has determined that an employee is unable to perform the work of his/her present position, or any other position in the agency, the employer may remove the employee from the job and place him/her on involuntary leave and apply on the employee’s behalf for disability retirement.

Existing law also generally requires that, while the application for disability retirement is pending, the state employer must permit the employee to use leave credits or, if the leave credits have been exhausted, pay the employee a sufficient temporary allowance so that the employee receives payment equal to the estimated retirement allowance.

This latter provision in the law is not currently applicable to the CSU; AB 908 would make it applicable.

Status: PASSED [9 - 0] by the Assembly Higher Education Committee, April 1; PASSED [24 - 0] by Assembly Appropriations Committee, April 9, and placed on the Assembly Consent Calendar.

AB 1219 (Montanez) Inmate Education

Introduced: PASSED [5 - 2] by the Assembly Public Safety Committee and referred to the Assembly Education Committee, April 8.

Return to Archive List

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

March 28, 2003

CAPITOL NEWS

1. The House and the U.S. Senate have proposed two sharply different FY2004 budget resolutions for higher education. The House resolution cuts by one percent every discretionary and mandatory program not related to homeland security. According to the Chronicle of Higher Education, the mandatory cuts alone would slice away $10 billion from higher education appropriations over the next decade.

The Senate version which, not surprisingly, is favored by the higher education associations, would subtract $1.8 billion from President Bush’s proposed $726 billion tax cut, and put it in the Pell Grant Program instead. If the Senate version is adopted, the Pell Grant minimum would increase by $500, from the current $4,050 to $4,550.

2. Federal legislation introduced to provide benefits to students in the military. H.R. 1412, the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act of 2003 (HEROES), introduced in the House on March 25, would allow the U.S. Secretary of Education to provide appropriate assistance and flexibility to military personnel as they transfer in and out of postsecondary education during the war. It also asks institutions to provide a full refund of tuition and fees to students who were not able to complete educational requirements during the time they serve. The bill has 22 co-authors, 3 of whom are from California, including Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon (R - Santa Clarita).

3. The Institute for Higher Education Policy (IHEP) has issued a report predicting probable outcomes in the Reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, currently underway. (The Act is set to expire every five years and must be reauthorized by Congress. The current Act will expire on September 30, 2004.) The report cites 6 reasons why the reauthorization will likely see only “incremental” rather than fundamental changes in the Act:

· Absence of any landmark study or national commission report calling for major changes;

· Lack of public perception that there is a major problem in higher education that needs fixing;

· Other national priorities, such as the war on Iraq, terrorism, homeland security, reforming health care financing and stimulating economic growth;

· Bush Administration’s emphasis on elementary and secondary education over postsecondary education during the past two years;

· Growing federal budget deficit; and a

· Closely divided Congress, even though both chambers have a Republican majority.

The report indicates that the “reauthorization may take policy in a positive direction, by expanding access to higher education for those who would not otherwise attend, or by decreasing unnecessary regulatory burdens on colleges and universities,” or it could take a negative direction by making changes in the federal needs analysis system, for example, which would effectively narrow access.

The Institute’s full report can be accessed on line at the IHEP’s website: http://www.ihep.com/Pubs/PDF/ReAuthHea.pdf

4. Controversial Virginia Tech Board’s policy restricting political speech declared unconstitutional. The Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University’s Governing Board (Board of Visitors) established a policy that prohibited anyone who had ever participated in or advocated “illegal acts of domestic violence and terrorism” from meeting on the campus. The new policy, which applied to faculty and students and all locations on the campus, also required that all requests for campus meetings be submitted 30 days in advance to the University president for approval.

The Board’s action was taken with no advance notice, and in the absence of prior consultation with the University’s top officials, including the president. Nine days after the policy was adopted, William H. Hurd, Solicitor General in the Virginia State Attorney General’s Office, issued a statement declaring the new rules violated constitutional rights to free assembly and free speech.

Mr. Hurd’s statement, quoted in part in the Chronicle of Higher Education, stated that “a university--of all places--should be willing, in the words of Thomas Jefferson, ‘to tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it.’ For universities to prohibit the use of their facilities for constitutionally protected speech--based on the perceived illegitimacy or offensiveness of the viewpoint expressed--is contrary to the role of a university as a marketplace of ideas and violates the constitutional prohibition against viewpoint discrimination.”

The Chronicle also reported University President, Charles W. Steger’s strong statement emphasizing the importance of free speech on campus: “As a university, one of our primary functions is to help students develop the capacity to think critically in order to evaluate new ideas, and we have the greatest confidence in our students’ ability to do so.”

The Chair of the Virginia Board of Visitors, John C. Rocovich, indicated he had no regrets about the Board’s action, and was quoted as stating “the idea, as a general proposition, is still a good one.” He also said he might pursue a similar policy at a future Board meeting--but would seek the state attorney general’s approval first before calling for a vote on it

* NEW LEGISLATION OF INTEREST *
Note: Bills must be in print for 30 days before they can be heard by a committee.

AB 56 (Liu) K - University Master Plan: Child Care, Development and Education

Status: As amended on March 26, this bill now carries the content formerly in SB 7, which was gutted and amended on February 6 to pertain to other matters.

AB 907 (Pavley) Environmental Education

Introduced: March 6, 2003

AB 1778 (Committee on Higher Educ.) CSU: Omnibus Bill TRUSTEE BILL

The following proposals are included in the legislation:

None of the above proposals should result in a fiscal impact--cost or savings--to the CSU or the state.

Introduced: March 19, 2003

ACR 66 (Pavley) High School Exit Examination - Pupils with Disabilities

This Assembly Concurrent Resolution would urge the State Board of Education to delay the high school exit examination until issues are resolved regarding appropriate testing methods for pupils with disabilities.

Introduced: March 19, 2003

SB 25 (Bowen) Personal Information: Security

This bill contains numerous provisions relating to “fraud alerts” placed in credit reports, when consumers suspect they may be victims of identity theft.

Status: PASSED [5 - 2] by the Senate Judiciary Committee on March 18, and referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee on the same date.

AB 46 was passed [5 - 2] by the Assembly Public Safety Committee on March 11. In both cases, the vote was split on partisan lines, with Democrats voting in support, and Republicans voting in opposition.

* STATUS OF PREVIOUSLY INTRODUCED LEGISLATION *

AB 78 (Reyes) K-12 Curriculum

Expresses the encouragement of the Legislature for K-12 curriculum to contain instruction on the Vietnam War, including the “Secret War” in Laos, and the role of the Hmong and other Southeast Asians in that war. Additionally expresses the encouragement of the Legislature that the instruction include a component drawn from personal testimony of Hmong and other Southeast Asians who were involved in the Vietnam War and of those who contributed to the war effort on the homefront.

A March 17 amendment specifies that “this instruction be carried out in a manner that does not result in any duties or programs being imposed on school districts, nor mandating any additional costs.”

Status: PASSED [10 - 0], as amended, by the Assembly Education Committee, March 19, and placed on the Assembly Consent Calendar.

AB 680 (Liu) Community College Fees

As initially introduced, this bill sought to impose an additional $10 fee per unit on students with Bachelor’s degrees who enroll at community colleges.

As amended on March 24, the bill now requires the following:

· Students without Bachelor’s degrees would pay $16 per unit per semester for the 2003-04 academic year; and $21 per unit per semester for 2004-05.

· Students with a Bachelor’s degree would pay a $25 fee per unit per semester for 2003-04 and 2004-05.

· After 2004-05, the fee--irrespective of whether the student has a Bachelor’s degree--would be $25 per unit per semester.

Currently, the community college districts may retain only 2% of the student fee revenue, with that money used to cover the administrative costs to collect it. The bill, as amended, would exempt the fee increase revenue from this requirement for 2003-04.

Status: Following the March 24 amendments, the bill was referred back to the Assembly Committee on Higher Education.

AB 1278 (Horton, J.) Economics of Higher Education

Existing law requires the governing board of each school district to prescribe certain courses of study for its high schools, designed to provide the skills and knowledge needed to become productive adults.

This bill would add to this requirement a course of study relating to the economics of higher education, and instruction on completing forms relating to student financial aid.

As amended on March 26, the bill now states the intent of the Legislature that the course be taught in a 12^th grade consumer economic course, and that the California Student Aid Commission absorb the costs and provide the materials needed for the instruction.

Status: Following the March 26 amendments, the bill was referred back to the Assembly Education Committee.

AB 1323 (Jackson) Decentralization of the Cal Grant Program

As initially introduced, this bill expressed legislative intent to direct the Student Aid Commission to implement, by March 1, 2004, a decentralized, campus-based approach for the delivery of Cal Grant awards, both Entitlement and Competitive.

As amended on March 25, the bill would require the California Postsecondary Education Commission (CPEC) to establish a Cal Grant Delivery Transition Work Group to develop a plan to implement the decentralized approach. The bill would additionally require CPEC to submit its plan to the Legislature by December 31, 2004.

[Note: The CSU supports the recommendation for a decentralized Cal Grant delivery system, since it will simplify the award determination and notification processes for CSU students. However, the system believes that a main issue that needs to be addressed for successful decentralization is the cost of the current Cal Grant delivery system as compared to this new approach. Without a clearer understanding of the institutional resources associated with administering Cal Grants under the current delivery system, and the potential new costs to operate the decentralized model, the 3 higher education segments are reluctant to advocate for the change, given the potential impact on their respective budgets. The March 25 amendment provides an avenue for addressing these concerns.]

Status: Following the March 25 amendments, the bill was referred back to the Assembly Higher Education Committee.

AB 1368 (Kehoe) Accountability in State Bonds

As initially introduced, this bill would have required any statewide bond measure to contain specified accountability actions relating to the purposes of the measure and the projects to be funded, and would have additionally required that a specified annual report be provided to the Legislature and the Department of Finance.

Since statewide bonds are already subject to accountability requirements, the purpose of this legislation was puzzling. Perhaps to others as well, since the bill was amended on March 27 to require instead that the head of the lead state agency administering the bond proceeds, report annually to the Legislature and the Department of Finance on the projects funded by any statewide initiative.

Status: Following the March 27 amendments, the bill was referred back to the Assembly Banking and Finance Committee.

SB 301 (Alarcon) Commission on Latino/Latina Affairs

This bill would create a 13-member Commission on Latino/Latina Affairs to advise the Governor, the Legislature and state agencies, departments and commissions on issues relating to the social and economic development, and the rights and interests of Latino/Latina communities.

Status: PASSED [10 - 1] by the Senate Governmental Organization Committee on March 25, and referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee on the same date. [Note: Senator Ross Johnson (R - Irvine) cast the sole dissenting vote.]

SB 383 (Alarcon) College Preparatory Commission

As initially introduced, this bill sought to establish a College Preparatory Commission, whose purpose would be to determine a model college preparatory curriculum for public high schools.

The Commission would include representatives from all three segments of public higher education--UC, CSU, and the California Community Colleges--as well as from private colleges and universities, the State Department of Education, the State Board of Education, teachers (including vocational education and career technology teachers), counselors, parents, and students.

Finally, the Commission would be authorized to apply for and accept grants, and receive gifts, donations, and other financial support from public or private sources to carry out its work.

As amended on March 26, the bill renames the Commission the “Postsecondary Readiness Commission,” with all members appointed by the Secretary of Education, and adds three additional members: Representatives of the Director of Industrial Relations, the California Workforce Investment Board and the Office of the Secretary of Education.

The March 26 amendment also expanded the purpose of the Commission to include successful preparation of high school pupils for “post-high school options” that include vocational education/career technical components.

Status: Following the March 26 amendments, the bill was referred back to the Senate Education Committee.

SB 461 (Burton) State Retirees: Vision Care Benefits

This bill would require the Public Employees’ Retirement System to provide state annuitants, who retire on or before January 1, 2004, and their family members with vision care benefits comparable to those provided to active state employees. [Note: This bill would include CSU retirees.]

Status: PASSED [3 - 2] by the Senate Committee on Public Employment and Retirement on March 24, and sent forward to the Senate Appropriations Committee on the same date.

Return to Archive List

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

March 14, 2003

CAPITOL NEWS

1. Assembly Speaker Herb Wesson suspends all policy committee hearings. The Speaker said he took this extraordinary action in order to bring a powerful focus, without distraction, of all of the lower house legislators on the state’s fiscal problems. The suspension will last through the end of March. Speaker Wesson also indicated the Assembly would hold a series of hearings throughout the state to hear comment on the impact of the $17 billion in program reductions proposed in the Governor’s 2003-04 Budget. Some of these public forums have already taken place, even before the Speaker’s call for them. Senator Jack Scott (D - Pasadena) and Assembly Member Dario Frommer (D - Glendale/Pasadena), for example, held a Town Hall meeting in Burbank on the state budget on March 1.

2. CSU descends on state Capitol. Delegations from all 23 campuses in the California State University system will spend two days in Sacramento next week (March 17 - 18), meeting with lawmakers to demonstrate the value of higher education to employers, not only in meeting workforce needs, but in providing nearly 60% of the state’s credentialed teachers. CSU also produces over 55% of all health care related degrees in California; confers degrees on over 44% of the state’s engineering students and over 38% of the state’s mathematics students; and provides almost 50% of business and management degrees in California.

Maintaining access, not only to admission, but to classes, to advisement, to student services, and to an environment conducive to learning will be the theme championed by delegates, as the CSU struggles to safeguard its programs from any reductions beyond the $326 million proposed in the Governor’s 2003-04 budget.

CSUN’s delegation will be led by President Jolene Koester, and will comprise two graduate students, Kevin Mojaradi, a CSUN graduate student in public health, Phillip Leonard, President of Toolshed, Inc., a non-profit organization that addresses the needs of at-risk youth; Bob Rawitch, Vice President of Winner and Associates, and a member of the CSUN Foundation Board; Irene Tovar, President of the CSUN Alumni Association; Gray Mounger, Assistant Vice President of CSUN Alumni Relations; and myself. Wayne Adelstein, CEO of the Northridge Chamber of Commerce, CSUN Alumnus, and the current President of the CSU Statewide Alumni Association, will join the CSUN delegation on the second day.

The community colleges will also be represented in Sacramento next week: The Californians for Community Colleges will hold a news conference, march and rally on Monday, to oppose disproportionate budget cuts and unfair fee increases. The University of California sent its delegations to the state Capitol on March 3 - 4.

3. Education Challenges in California are discussed in the April issue of California Journal. The magazine notes the paradox of the state’s spending “a whopping 53% of its budget on education, while lagging on how much it spends per pupil when compared to the rest of the country.” California currently ranks 29^th in the country, spending $6,916 per pupil; the national average is $7,463.

Another noteworthy statistic: California, at 35%, ranks slightly above the bottom five states in terms of numbers of students that go on to college. The top five states are:

· North Dakota 59%

·         Massachusetts            54%

·         New Jersey               54%

·         Iowa                     53%

·         Nebraska                 52%

The bottom five are:

·         Alaska           24%

·         Nevada         26%

·         Arizona        28%

·         Georgia        31%

·         Texas        31%

4.       Condoleezza Rice for Governor? Carla Marinucci, San Francisco Chronicle political writer reported last week that according to “high-level GOP insiders,” the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs had ruled out a bid for U. S. Senator Barbara Boxer’s seat next year--but not the possibility of running for Governor in 2006. Marinucci noted that, “While preliminary polls show Rice’s name recognition and positive ratings to be high in California, her political future is heavily tied to the outcome in Iraq--where she has strongly advocated the use of military force.”

Prior to her appointment in the Bush Administration in 2000, Rice served as Provost of Stanford University from 1993 to 1999, when she stepped down to take a year’s leave of absence from the university. From 1991-1993, she was the Thomas and Barbara Stephenson Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution.

Republicans are ecstatic at the possibility of Rice’s candidacy, believing she will win back respect, not to mention numbers for Republicans holding elected office in California. No word from Arnold Schwartzenegger on whether he would stay in the race, if she does become a candidate.

5.       Republicans are beginning to line up to challenge U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer, whose term expires in 2004. According to UPI’s Capital Comment, the list includes Michael Reagan, son of the former president and currently a talk show host; three sitting Congressmen: Rep. George Radanovich (Fresno), Rep. Doug Ose (Woodland), and Rep. Darrell Issa (San Diego); state Assembly Member Abel Maldonado (Santa Maria); Dennis Prager, another radio talk show host, and Denise Brown, sister of Nicole Brown Simpson. No word from Arnold Schwartzenegger on whether he would have any interest in this race.

6.       Meanwhile, the list of Democrats interested in challenging President Bush in 2004, or who have already declared their candidacy, grows. To date, the list includes: Senator John Kerry (Massachusetts); the two senators from Connecticut, Joe Lieberman and Christopher Dodd; Senator John Edwards (North Carolina), Senator Bob Graham (Florida); Senator Joseph Biden (Delaware); and two former senators, Carol Mosley-Braun (Illinois) and Gary Hart (Colorado); former Democratic House Leader Dick Gephardt (Missouri); Rep. Dennis Kucinich (Ohio); the former Governor of Vermont, Howard Dean; and civil rights activist, Al Sharpton.

7.       Former State Insurance Commissioner, Charles Quackenbush, has opened a political consulting firm in Hawaii, where he now resides. Quackenbush, who resigned under threat of impeachment three years ago, apparently does not want for clients. California Journal reports he has become an adviser to Republicans in the Hawaii statehouse.

8.       Secure telephone line isn’t. The Department of Homeland Security asked all of the states’ governors to install secure emergency telephone lines to facilitate direct and rapid communication in the event of a disaster or terrorist attack. A new emergency telephone was installed in North Dakota Governor John Hoeven’s office, and in the first week, the phone rang three times. The first call was a wrong number. The second two were from a local pizza parlor, offering the Governor a “two pizzas for one” special.

The Governor’s spokesperson, Don Canton, said that the line has been re-programmed so that Governor Hoeven won’t be getting any more telemarketers--and callers from the Department of Homeland Security won’t be getting any busy signals.

9.       The French influence. From the March 11 edition of the Congressional Quarterly comes this report: “The House cafeterias will be serving up ‘freedom fries’ and ‘freedom toast’ in a bid to scrub the French influence from the menu. Bob Ney (R-Ohio), chairman of the House Administration Committee, today ordered cafeterias in the House office buildings to rename French fries and French toast to express the dissatisfaction with France’s opposition to U.S. policy on Iraq. ‘This action today is a small but symbolic effort to show the strong displeasure of many on Capitol Hill with the actions of our so-called ally, France,’ Ney said in a statement. No word yet on what happens to French dressing.”

10.    Nearly every state legislature in the nation is grappling with budget deficits, with some lawmakers resorting to desperate means to find money. As reported this week in StateNet, Georgia lawmakers are contemplating a sell-off of state land, including the Mulberry Grove Plantation--where Eli Whitney invented the cotton gin.

11.    This issue of Legislative Update concludes the report on bills of interest, of the more than 2000 that were introduced before the February 21 deadline. The newsletter will resume its bi-weekly publishing schedule with the next issue.

*     NEW LEGISLATION OF INTEREST     *
Note: Bills must be in print for 30 days before they can be heard by a committee.

A   AB 1051                      (Goldberg)                      Capital Facilities Fees

This bill would allow utility districts to unilaterally impose capital facilities fees (fees applied to public and private users of public utility facilities) on public agencies--which would include educational institutions, counties, cities, and any of their subdivisions.

Current law provides that such fees must be mutually agreed upon. Under compromise legislation enacted in 1988, educational agencies agreed to pay any capital facilities fees they had been paying in the past and agreed to allow those fees to increase automatically with inflation. In return, the utility districts agreed to limitations on new capital facilities fees, and fee increases above the inflation index. In addition, the fees had to be for facilities “actually serving” the affected agency, and they could be imposed only after negotiation and agreement between the assessing and the paying public agencies.

This bill would adversely affect the CSU and other public agencies by allowing utility districts to embed the full cost of their capital improvements for the infrastructure of their entire district into the CSU’s monthly bills, without regard to whether or not those facilities actually serve one of our campuses or facilities. This legislation could result in millions of dollars in additional costs to the CSU each year.

[Note: A similar bill, SB 1132, was introduced by Senator Jim Costa (D - Fresno) in the 1999 session. The CSU joined the University of California and a coalition of other public agencies in a statewide campaign to prevent it from moving forward. The bill passed out of the Senate, but stopped in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.]

Introduced:              February 20, 2003

AB 1144                      (Pavley)                CSU: Employees

This bill would provide CSU employees who are appealing notices of adverse actions, and university employees with disabilities who are challenging denials of requests for reasonable accommodations, with procedural rights that are similar to those granted to state civil service employees.

Introduced:              February 21, 2003

AB 1219                      (Montanez)                      Inmate Education

Existing law establishes the position of Superintendent of Correctional Education. This bill would eliminate this position and establish instead the Robert E. Burton Correctional Education Board within the Department of Corrections to approve education programs in prisons.

The Board, which would comprise 15 members, including one representative each from the UC, CSU, and the California Community Colleges system, would be required to approve the education programs, and to adopt rules and regulations for the admission of inmate students to them.

The bill would additionally require the Board to submit a report to the Legislature on or before January 1, 2006, with recommendations for further reorganization of correctional education in California, focusing on attaining parallel education structures between correctional and public education, funding sources, and correctional student rights.

Introduced:              February 21, 2003

AB 1226                      (Montanez)                      Credit Unions

This bill would direct the Legislative Analyst’s Office to review the feasibility of imposing a fee on state and federally chartered credit unions for purposes of funding public education and creating some parity between the credit unions and other financial institutions.

Introduced:              February 21, 2003

AB 1250                      (Laird)                      Teacher Development: Bias and Discrimination

This bill seeks to establish a program of ongoing professional instruction for teachers on the prevention of bias and discrimination in the public schools.

Introduced:              February 21, 2003

AB 1278                      (Horton, J.)                      Economics of Higher Education

Existing law requires the governing board of each school district to prescribe certain courses of study for its high schools, designed to provide the skills and knowledge needed to become productive adults.

This bill would add to this requirement a course of study relating to the economics of higher education, and instruction on completing forms relating to student financial aid.

Introduced:              February 21, 2003

AB 1323                      (Jackson)                      Decentralization of the Cal Grant Program

This bill expresses legislative intent to direct the Student Aid Commission to implement, by March 1, 2004, a decentralized, campus-based approach for the delivery of Cal Grant awards, both Entitlement and Competitive.

[Note: The CSU supports the recommendation for a decentralized Cal Grant delivery system, since it will simplify the award determination and notification processes for CSU students. However, the system believes that a main issue that needs to be addressed for successful decentralization is the cost of the current Cal Grant delivery system as compared to this new approach. Without a clearer understanding of the institutional resources associated with administering Cal Grants under the current delivery system, and the potential new costs to operate the decentralized model, the 3 higher education segments are reluctant to advocate for the change, given the potential impact on their respective budgets.]

Introduced:              February 21, 2003

AB 1368                      (Kehoe)                      Accountability in State Bonds

This bill would require any statewide bond measure to contain specified accountability actions relating to the purposes of the measure and the projects to be funded, and would additionally require that a specified annual report be provided to the Legislature and the Department of Finance.

[Note: Senator Richard Alarcon (D - Van Nuys) introduced, and successfully shepherded through the state legislature, a similar accountability measure for local bond measures.]

Introduced:              February 21, 2003

AB 1550                      (Goldberg)                      Standards for New School Facilities

This bill would implement one of the recommendations in the Joint Master Plan for K - University Education. It would require the Department of General Services (1) to adopt regulations establishing standards for new facilities, including, but not limited to, early childhood education and postsecondary education facilities; and (2) to establish and maintain an inventory of all available public educational facilities.

The bill would additionally require the Legislative Analyst and the Director of Finance to jointly develop a plan for the construction of facilities for all sectors of public higher education.

Introduced:              February 21, 2003

AB 1582                      (Koretz)                      Abusive Work Environments

This bill makes it an unlawful employment practice to subject an employee to an abusive work environment, and would specify that an employer is vicariously liable for a violation committed by any of its employees. “Employer,” as defined in the bill, includes the California State University and the University of California.

Introduced:              February 21, 2003

AB 1583                      (Koretz)                      Primary Care Physicians

This bill would prohibit a state agency, including the California State University, from employing a primary care physician as an independent contractor when there is an unfilled, full-time primary care physician position available within the state agency.

Introduced:              February 21, 2003

SB 728                      (Scott)                      Student Financial Aid: Cal Grant Program

This bill provides that any applicant who qualifies to be considered under the simplified needs test, established by federal law for student assistance, shall be presumed to meet the asset level requirements established for the Cal Grant Program.

Introduced:              February 21, 2003

SB 777                      (Escutia)                      Whistleblowers

This bill would extend whistleblower protections to employees who report a violation of a state or federal rule, or who refuse to participate in an activity that would result in a violation of a state or federal statute, or in noncompliance with a state or federal rule or regulation.

The bill specifically includes the state “and any division thereof (including the CSU) and the University of California.”

Introduced:              February 21, 2003

SB 789                      (Johnson)              State Economy: Suspension of Statutes

This bill seeks to suspend a number of statutes enacted in 1998, 2000, and 2002, relating to agreements involving school employees, student financial aid, public works, and personal services.

One of the specified statutes that would be suspended relates to the Assumption Program of Loans for Education (APLE). The statute, enacted by SB 1330 in 2000, increased the maximum amount of loan assumption benefits that can be earned under APLE for individuals who teach 4 years in math, science or special education, or who teach in low performing schools.

Introduced:              February 21, 2003

SB 971                      (Burton)                CSU: Outside Employment                      TRUSTEE BILL

This bill would require each executive employee, managerial employee, supervisory employee, and full-time faculty unit employee of the CSU to report any other employment he/she holds during the period of his/her employment by the university.

[Note: The CSU Trustees are sponsoring this legislation in an effort to ensure that outside employment and business activities do not conflict with normal work assignments or the satisfactory performance of duties.]

Introduced:              February 21, 2003

SCR 12                      (Alarcon)                      Master Plan to End Poverty in California

This Senate Concurrent Resolution establishes the Joint Committee to Develop a Master Plan to End Poverty in California, comprising 7 members each from the Senate and the Assembly, which would be required to report to the Legislature on the state of poverty in California.

The measure provides for the Joint Committee’s continued existence until December 31, 2005, and stipulates that the Senate Rules Committee may make money available from the Senate Operating Fund, as it deems necessary, for the expenses of the joint committee and its members.

Introduced:              February 21, 2003

Return to Archive List

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

March 7, 2003

CAPITOL NEWS

1.       The big news this week is the City and School Board elections. Races in City Council Districts 2 (where Wendy Greuel ran unopposed), 4, 6, and 8, which featured highly favored candidates saw very low voter turnouts. But even in districts which had 7 or more candidates or which pitted strong candidates against each other, the turnout was low. Citywide, about 13% showed up at the polls. In the 12th District, which includes the University, voters were presented with 8 candidates, 2 of them write-ins, and only a little over 20% bothered to vote.

Because no candidate garnered 50% + 1 of the vote in the 10th and 12th districts, runoffs in both will be held on May 20. Greig Smith, former Chief of Staff to incumbent City Councilman Hal Bernson, and LAUSD Board of Education member, Julie Korenstein, will face each other in the 12th district. Labor activist and former legislative aide, Martin Ludlow, will challenge Deron Williams, former council aide to Nate Holden, in the 10th.

Tumultuous times ahead are likely for the Mayor and City Council President Alex Padilla with the election of Bernard Parks and Antonio Villaraigosa in the 8th and 14th districts, respectively. Hahn did not support a second term for former Police Chief Parks, and he defeated former Assembly Speaker Villaraigosa two years ago in a contentious race for Mayor. Padilla supported Hahn for Mayor and the Mayor’s position on Chief Parks.

Incumbents prevailed in the Community College Offices, although Mona Field is two points shy of the 50% needed to avoid a runoff, and may face Joyce Garcia who, at 23% garnered the second highest number of votes in the 4-candidate race. Absentee ballots yet to be counted will determine the need for a runoff. The Board of Education races, however, turned out two incumbents in the 4 districts up for election. By a surprisingly high margin, 40% to 59%, School Board President Caprice Young lost to Jon Lauritzen, a retired teacher (and CSUN graduate). Young was supported by the Coalition for Kids, a group formed by former Mayor Richard Riordan and billionaire Eli Broad to recruit candidates and promote school reform issues, while Lauritzen had the support of the teachers union, United Teachers of Los Angeles.

In a much closer race, incumbent Marguerite Pointdexter Lamotte, a retired school principal, defeated incumbent Genethia Hudley-Hayes, 51% to 48%. Lamotte was the union candidate. Incumbent David Tokofsky appears to have won his seat outright, with 51% of the vote. With absentee ballots yet to be counted, though, he could end up in a runoff against Nellie Rios-Parra, who secured the second highest number of votes (27%) in the 4-person contest. Incumbent Mike Lansing, the Coalition’s candidate, easily defeated his challenger, winning 73% of the vote. Unless Julie Korenstein emerges as the victor in the 12th District City Council runoff, the union will become the new majority on the Board. A union majority will likely dampen break-up efforts, which increasingly had been touted by the defeated Coalition-backed members.

2.       Senate Leader Jim Brulte (R - Rancho Cucamonga) introduced the GOP’s plan for balancing the budget this week. The proposal essentially contains 3 elements: It would balance the budget over two years by carrying forward $8 billion of the deficit; establish a 7% across-the-board cut for all state agencies; and it would freeze spending for two years.   The plan does not include any tax or fee increases or new levies.   (The Governor’s plan proposed $8.2 billion in tax increases and $500 million in new fees.) Not surprisingly, neither the Governor nor the Democratic leadership in the Legislature saw much merit in the proposal, although Senate President pro Tem John Burton said he could support the rollover.

Sacramento Bee columnist Daniel Weintraub noted that “if spread across the budget evenly, the cuts [Brulte] is calling for would take another $2 billion from K-12 education--about $333 per child--and $450 million more from the University of California and the California State University system.”

3.       Controversial “Pledge” ruling upheld. In a move that will surely send the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals last week refused to reconsider the ruling last summer of its 3-judge panel that reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools is unconstitutional.

The case began last June when a Sacramento father, a self-described atheist, filed suit on behalf of his daughter, an Elk Grove elementary school student, who he argued was being coerced to recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Although the mother has primary custody of the daughter and said reciting the Pledge did not bother her, the 9th Circuit Court found that the father still had standing to pursue his lawsuit.

The smaller panel’s decision was stayed following public outcry, and the possibility of a hearing by the full 24-judge Circuit Court. However, a majority must vote to hear a case, and since only 9 of the 13 judges required favored a rehearing, the smaller panel’s decision prevailed. However, in announcing its decision not to hear the case, the Court did release an amended version of the original decision, narrowing its scope to apply only to reciting the Pledge in the public schools. Groups and organizations reciting the Pledge are not affected by the ruling.

The Elk Grove school district Superintendent, David W. Gordon, asked the Appeals Court for a 90 day extension of the original stay--which was granted--while the district asks for a review by the U.S. Supreme Court. Gordon stated at a press conference that if the stay hadn’t been granted, he would have asked schools in his district to replace with Pledge with other patriotic exercises, such as songs, poems or quotes from historic figures. “Reciting the Pledge is a patriotic, not a religious, act that teaches students civic values and respect for America,” he said.

Interestingly, the nation’s highest court opens each session with the words, “God save this honorable court.”

4.       At the California Republican Party Convention last week, delegates voted to oppose the second part of the

K - University Bond Initiative, slated for the March 2004 ballot. The vote upset some of the party members who sit on school boards and concerned others who felt the vote would alienate members of the California Chamber of Commerce and the California Business Roundtable, who were strong supporters of Proposition 47, which brought the first part of the K - University Bond Initiative to voters last November. The business leaders are a significant segment of the GOP fundraising support.

However, Senate Minority Leader, Jim Brulte, was quoted in the political newsletter, Political Pulse, that he did not foresee a problem. Former state Assemblyman Bill Leonard, a conservative Republican who currently sits on the State Board of Equalization, was quoted as agreeing with Brulte, indicating that he did not see the Republican position as a real threat to the passage of the statewide bond initiative. “The vote is just the sense of the delegates here. There is no money behind it to defeat the bond. In fact, a lot of Republicans I talk to support the bonds in their communities.”

Tom Hudson, Vice President of the California Republican Assembly, who made the motion to oppose the bond initiative, felt the school bond measure could further damage the state’s bond rating. Hudson made his motion in response to the convention committee’s recommendation that the Party remain neutral on the school bond ballot measure.

5.       Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon (R - Santa Clarita) announced his intention this week to introduce the College Affordability in Higher Education Act of 2003.   In an advance press release, McKeon expressed his frustration over ever increasing college tuition rates despite a decade of hearing “people from all sides of the issue talk about making college affordable for all American families.”   Lamenting the lack of result, McKeon said, “I will not wait any longer. Students are depending on us now.”

Under McKeon’s proposal, a college that raised its tuition by twice the rate of inflation must provide the U.S. Department of Education with an explanatory statement and a strategic plan for holding down future tuition increases. If the rate of increase is not reduced below that ceiling within one year, sanctions will be invoked, including the institution’s loss of eligibility for student financial aid.

McKeon said, “The last thing I want to do is tell colleges how to run their businesses. But I don’t want to be an accomplice helping them raise their prices by providing more and more federal aid. We’re doing our part--we’ve increased spending on Pell Grants and reduced student-loan interest rates to an all-time low. But we can never provide enough aid if colleges just keep raising their costs.”

McKeon’s proposal was not met with much enthusiasm by the nation’s higher education associations. Terry W. Hartle, Senior Vice President for Government and Public Affairs at the American Council on Education, in a statement to the Chronicle of Higher Education, questioned the poor timing of the bill when “so many financially strapped states are slashing their support for higher education, forcing many public colleges to raise their tuition.” He also noted that, “37 states enacted midyear budget cuts this academic year, and at least 20 states expect to spend less next year than they did this year.”

California enacted mid-year cuts that resulted in a loss of more than $125 million to the CSU:

·         $59.6 million unspecified budget reductions [CSU to determine the programs];

·         $43 million in one-time, long-term needs (technology--network equipment, libraries and deferred maintenance);

·         $18.5 million in unfunded health care costs; and

·         $4.3 million in unfunded compensation costs.

The Governor’s budget for 2003-04 proposes to reduce CSU’s support budget by an additional $326 million, not including $78.6 million in unfunded mandatory costs.

To cope with these reductions, the CSU Board of Trustees proposed a student fee increase of 10% on undergraduate students and 15% on graduate students--with one-third of the revenue earmarked for financial aid to assist the neediest students. The Trustees approved this increase--the first in 8 years--only after lengthy debate and much agonizing. The Governor has proposed an additional 25% increase for undergraduate students and a 20% increase for graduate students in his 2003-04 budget.

If the Congressman’s proposal were in place today, California’s public higher educational institutions would already be dramatically out of compliance, given the current rate of inflation--2.45%--in the United States.

*     NEW LEGISLATION OF INTEREST     *
Note: Bills must be in print for 30 days before they can be heard by a committee.

AB 772                      (Jackson)                      Educational Equity: Annual Assurances

Existing law requires all educational institutions, prior to the receipt of any state financial assistance or state student financial aid, to provide assurance to the agency administering the funds, that each program or activity conducted by the educational institution is in compliance with the provisions of state law prohibiting discrimination at elementary and secondary educational institutions, and prohibiting discrimination based on sex at postsecondary educational institutions.

The bill would instead require the assurances to be provided annually, and would require compliance with federal as well as with state law.

Introduced:              February 19, 2003

AB 791                      (Pavley)                      Commission on Teacher Credentialing

This bill seeks to require the Legislative Analyst to conduct a study to review the success of the Commission on Teacher Credentialing in performing its assigned functions and to assess the feasibility of merging the commission with the State Department of Education.

Introduced:              February 20, 2003

AB 825                      (Firebaugh)                      Community College Transfers: Student Financial Aid              TRUSTEE BILL

This bill seeks to eliminate certain requirements for community college transfer students seeking Cal Grant awards. The existing requirement that student recipients of these awards must not meet the federal definition of “independent student,” and that recipients graduate from a California high school during or after the 2000-01 academic year, would be eliminated. The bill would also lower the minimum grade point average required for recipients from 2.4 to 2.0.

Introduced:              February 20, 2003

AB 833                      (Steinberg)                      Gender Equity in Athletics

This bill states the intent of the Legislature to strengthen California law requiring gender equity in athletics.

Introduced:              February 20, 2003

AB 841                      (Vargas)                 Pupil Motivation and Maintenance Program

This bill would require each outreach consultant utilized for purposes of a school-based motivation and maintenance program to possess a Dropout Prevention Specialist Certificate from a California State University.

The bill would also require a school-based motivation and maintenance program plan to include provisions for participation in specified activities organized and provided by the network of schools implementing pupil motivation and maintenance programs.

Introduced:              February 20, 2003

AB 843                      (Assm. Higher Educ. Committee)         Responsibility for Adjusting Student Fees

This bill seeks to amend the Donahoe Higher Education Act to provide that the UC Regents and the CSU Trustees bear the primary responsibility for adjusting mandatory systemwide resident student fees at their respective systems.

The bill would require the UC and CSU to develop methodologies for the adjustment of fees in accordance with principles and a prescribed procedure, which the bill sets forth. The impact and resulting outcome that the methodology [used in developing a proposal for increasing fees] will have on students and the quality of the system must be considered, and the systems must include a mitigation plan, in the event their methodology results in a negative impact.

Finally, the bill would require the California Postsecondary Education Commission to annually review and report to the Legislature and the Director of Finance about the policies and procedures adopted pursuant to this bill.

Introduced:              February 20, 2003

AB 858                      (Goldberg)                      Athletic Team Names and Mascots

This bill would establish the Jerry Ballesteros Act, which would prohibit public schools from using certain specified terms relating to Native American tribal names, as a school or athletic team name, mascot, or nickname. The bill also states that the State Board of Education may not waive the prohibition.

The bill provides for certain exemptions: (1) It would not apply to a school or campus if certain conditions regarding prior expenditures on uniforms and other materials are met (eg: if they were purchased before January 1, 2004, and if the school selects a new school or athletic team name, mascot, or nickname); and (2) it would also not apply to certain schools located within “Indian country,” as defined.

[Note: AB 858 is essentially a reintroduction of AB 2115, introduced last year by Assembly Member Goldberg. That bill failed passage on a vote of 29-35 in the state Assembly. The vote was 12 shy of the 41-vote majority she needed to advance her bill to the Senate.]

Introduced:              February 20, 2003

AB 908                      (Chan)                  CSU: Disability Retirement

Existing law generally requires that, when a state employer has determined that an employee is unable to perform the work of his/her present position, or any other position in the agency, the employer may remove the employee from the job and place him/her on involuntary leave and apply on the employee’s behalf for disability retirement.

Existing law also generally requires that, while the application for disability retirement is pending, the state employer must permit the employee to use leave credits or, if the leave credits have been exhausted, pay the employee a sufficient temporary allowance so that the employee receives payment equal to the estimated retirement allowance.

This latter provision in the law is not currently applicable to the CSU; AB 908 would make it applicable.

Introduced:              February 20, 2003

AB 978                      (McLeod)              CSU: Disability Benefits

Existing law authorizes the CSU Trustees to elect to become employers whose employees are eligible for payment of disability benefits from the continuously appropriated Unemployment Compensation Disability Fund, provided that the election is the result of a negotiated agreement between the Trustees and a recognized employee bargaining organization.

This bill would require, rather than authorize, the Trustees to elect to become employers whose employees are eligible for payment of disability benefits from the Unemploy-ment Compensation Disability Fund. The bill would also provide that this eligibility for disability benefits could occur as a result of an election held by a recognized employee organization, as well as through a negotiated agreement.

Since this bill would increase the pool of potential recipients from the Unemployment Compensation Disability Fund, an appropriation [unspecified] would be made.

Introduced:              February 20, 2003

AB 1010       (Yee)                      Student Financial Aid: Loan Forgiveness

This bill would establish the Loan Forgiveness for Teachers of Blind and Visually Impaired Pupils Program under the administration of the Chancellor of the CSU. The bill would require a program participant to agree to teach blind or visually impaired pupils in a California public elementary or secondary school on a full-time basis for at least 4 school years.

Introduced:              February 20, 2003

AB 1056                      (Oropeza)                      Gender Equity in Athletics

This bill states the intent of the Legislature to allow the state to do whatever is necessary to achieve gender equity and to fully implement Title IX [federal law enacted in 1972 to require gender equity in university athletics].

Introduced:              February 20, 2003

AB 1709                      (Assm. Jud. Committee)         Discrimination: State Programs and Activities

This is a “spot bill,” which may be amended at a future date to include content similar to that proposed by Senator Kuehl, in SB 302, which would make applicable to the CSU provisions in the law providing protections and prohibitions relating to disabilities. [See February 28 Legislative Update.]

Introduced:              February 26, 2003

AJR 9                      (Firebaugh)                      Undocumented Students

This Assembly Joint Resolution seeks to memorialize the President and Congress of the United States to enact legislation to reform the federal Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 to allow states to set appropriate residency requirements and tuition policies for undocumented students.

Introduced:              February 20, 2003

SB 461                      (Burton)                State Retirees: Vision Care Benefits

This bill would require the Public Employees’ Retirement System to provide state annuitants, who retire on or before January 1, 2004, and their family members with vision care benefits comparable to those provided to active state employees. [Note: This bill would include CSU retirees.]

Introduced:              February 20, 2000

Return to Archive List

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

February 28, 2003

CAPITOL NEWS

1.       Californians polled on state’s economy. The Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) released the results of its latest survey this week on how California residents view the state’s budget and economy--and their outlook for the future. Interviews were conducted in both English and Spanish with 2,004 California residents by telephone, February 6 - 17. The results surprisingly mirrored some of the same consternation and inertia that many legislators feel. By a large majority, Californians cited the economy and jobs as the biggest problems facing the state (28%), followed by the state budget and taxes (15%). Education and schools was third with 11%, and war and terrorism was fourth with 10%. By an even larger majority (71%), Californians responded that they expected the bad times to continue in the coming year. (Last year about half of those surveyed anticipated that the fiscal picture would darken.)

In conveying their concerns about the problems facing the sate, 91% said they were worried about the level of cuts that might be made in education, health care, and the environment. There was no consensus on where reductions should be made. The survey showed that, despite the concerns over the growing deficit and falling economy, people still supported spending more for education (65%) and health and human services (52%). Far fewer respondents favored spending less on any state program--K-12 education (5%), higher education (15%), and public health (12%), to cite three examples. Interestingly, a majority of respondents (52%) said they would favor amending the state Constitution to include a spending cap.

The response to increasing taxes was mixed. Proposals that would affect smaller numbers of Californians were favored. Raising cigarette taxes was supported by 74%, and reinstating the top income tax bracket to 11% was preferred by 52%. Reaction to raising the state sales tax was pretty evenly divided, with 44% in favor and 52% opposed.

Other legislative tax proposals received mixed responses. Taxing Internet purchases, for example, was favored by 56% and opposed by 39%, but extending the state sales tax to include services was favored by only 37% and opposed by 60%. On the controversial Vehicle License Fee, Californians opposed restoring it to its former level: Just 39% favored restoration, while 58% opposed. Of interest to the public higher education community is the response on raising student fees at the University of California, the California State University, and the California Community Colleges. An overwhelming majority (76%) opposed any increases, while only 22% favored them.

On the general question of whether Californians preferred higher taxes and more services or lower taxes and fewer services, the response was split down the middle: 49% supported the former, and 45% preferred the latter.

With respect to Proposition 13, 57% said “it was mostly a good thing.” However, support for amending how the initiative treats commercial property is growing. Just over half--52%--favored the “split roll” approach to assessing commercial and residential properties.

Who’s responsible for the current fiscal mess? Californians cited as the top 3 culprits: Governor Davis (23%), population growth and immigration (16%), and the energy crisis (13%).

Those wishing to access the PPIC survey in its entirety can do so at this website: http://www.ppic.org

2.       Another state Legislature with too much time on its hands. In the last issue, I reported that the Wyoming state Legislature had recently defeated a bill seeking to declare the chocolate chip cookie that state’s official state cookie. In the interest of fairness, I must report that a California lawmaker introduced a bill, seeking to declare the Californian the official state tall ship.

3.       Law of Unintended Consequences. An L.A. legislator thought he came up with a unique plan to raise money to fund trauma care, by introducing legislation that would impose a fee of 10 cents on each bullet sold in the state. Apparently, the thought was that hunters and NRA members would be the primary source for the revenue. But who’s the largest purchaser of bullets?

Law enforcement has come out in force (pun unintended) to squash the bill.

*     NEW LEGISLATION OF INTEREST     *
Note: Bills must be in print for 30 days before they can be heard by a committee.

AB 618                      (Levine)                      Vehicles: Special License Plates

This bill seeks to establish a special license plate program for collegiate sports organizations and professional sports teams. It would require the funds derived under the program to be deposited in the Title IX Compliance Account, which the bill would establish in the General Fund.

Introduced:              February 19, 2003

AB 655         (Liu)                      Reconstitution of the California Postsecondary Education Commission [CPEC]

This bill would reconstitute CPEC as a 9-member commission. It would repeal the statute establishing the Student Aid Commission, and place all of its functions under CPEC’s administration. The bill also would remove the Bureau of Private Postsecondary and Vocational Education from the Department of Consumer Affairs and place it and its functions under CPEC’s administration.

Introduced:              February 19, 2003

AB 680         (Liu)                      Community College Fees

This bill seeks to require that community college students with bachelor’s degrees pay an additional fee per unit per semester. Specifically, current law requires these students to pay an additional $10 per unit per semester (on top of the current $11 per unit per semester fee). This bill would require that they pay $21, on top of the $11.

Introduced:              February 19, 2003

AB 705                      (Corbett)                      Career Technical Education

This bill seeks to implement one of the recommendations contained in the report of the Joint Committee to Develop a Master Plan for K - University Education [#24], that “the state should provide age-appropriate career curriculum and guidance for all students to prepare them to transition successfully from school to employment.”

Introduced:              February 19, 2003

AB 1185                      (Montanez)           CSU: Administrative Costs

This bill would require the Chancellor’s Office of the California State University, and each of the 23 campuses within the system, to provide annual reports, by January 1 of each year, to the Department of Finance, the Office of the Legislative Analyst, and the appropriate legislative budget and policy committees, providing the following information:

·         A detailed analysis of the administrative costs incurred in the previous fiscal year;

·         The percentage of general purpose funds devoted to administrative costs in the previous fiscal year; and

·         The percent increase or decrease in total administrative costs from the year prior to the previous fiscal year.

The bill defines “administrative costs” as general purpose funds expended for (1) salaries and benefits of executive management, administrators, supervisors, and managers of the Chancellor’s Office and of each campus of the CSU, who are not represented by a union; and (2) administrative overhead costs incurred to support administrative functions and administrative positions not represented by a union, including, but not limited to the following:

·         Car and housing allowances

·         Travel

·         Supplies and equipment

·         Leases

·         Computing support

·         Contractual services

·         Public relations and communications

·         Information technology

·         Consulting fees

·         Conference, training and seminar attendance

Introduced:              February 21, 2003

AB 1465                      (McLeod)              CSU: Continuing Education

This bill seeks to require, as a part of the annual independent audit of the California State University system, that there be a full accounting of the funds related to the CSU’s continuing education program. Specifically, the bill asks the audit to indicate the balance of every relevant fund at each CSU campus, and report how much revenue is generated from the following areas of continuing education:

·         Certificate programs

·         Off-campus degrees

·         Corporate training

·         Online programs and degrees

·         Special emphasis programs

·         Professional development

·         Test preparation

[Note: Continuing education programs are self-supporting, and are not funded by General Fund dollars.]

Introduced:               February 21, 2003

SB 301                       (Alarcon)                      Commission on Latino/Latina Affairs

This bill would create a 13-member Commission on Latino/Latina Affairs to advise the Governor, the Legislature and state agencies, departments and commissions on issues relating to the social and economic development, and the rights and interests of Latino/Latina communities.

Introduced:              February 19, 2003

SB 302                      (Kuehl)                      Discrimination: State Programs and Activities

Existing law prohibits discrimination against any person in any program or activity conducted, operated, or administered by the state or by any state agency, or that is funded directly by the state, or that receives any financial assistance from the state.

Existing law also requires, with respect to disability, that these programs and activities meet the protections and prohibitions contained in the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and the implementing rules and regulations accompanying that Act.

SB 302 would specifically apply these provisions to the California State University.

Introduced:              February 19, 2003

SB 336                      (Romero)                      Hiring Practices in Higher Education

This bill seeks to require the Office of the Legislative Analyst [LAO] to commission a study of the hiring practices of postsecondary education institutions. The LAO would be authorized to request representatives from all three systems--UC, CSU, and the California Community Colleges--to help examine the hiring practices. The bill requires the study specifically to examine hiring search processes, including, but not limited to, the following:

·         Whether or not the value of diverse faculty backgrounds is included in the job descriptions;

·         The diversity of the composition of search committees;

·         Whether or not postsecondary educational institutions publicize job opportunities;

·         The manner in which postsecondary educational institutions publicize job opportunities; and

·         Whether or not the postsecondary educational institutions utilize any faculty incentive programs.

[Note: The bill currently does not include dates by which the study must be completed, or to whom it should be submitted.]

Introduced:              February 19, 2003

SB 371                      (Hollingsworth)                      Resident Classification

This bill would eliminate the one-year limitation on resident classification for graduate students, and it would entitle members of the military reserves and military veterans, as well as members of their immediate families, to resident classification.

Introduced:              February 19, 2003

SB 383                      (Alarcon)                      College Preparatory Commission

This bill seeks to establish a College Preparatory Commission, whose purpose would be to determine a model college preparatory curriculum for public high schools.

The Commission would include representatives from all three segments of public higher education--UC, CSU, and the California Community Colleges--as well as from private colleges and universities, the State Department of Education, the State Board of Education, teachers (including vocational education and career technology teachers), counselors, parents, and students. (The bill does not include a specific number of members for the Commission.)

The Commission would be authorized to apply for and accept grants, and receive gifts, donations, and other financial support from public or private sources to carry out its work.

Introduced:              February 19, 2003

[Note: This legislation reflects Senator Alarcon’s continuing interest in strengthening college preparatory programs. Last year, he introduced SB 1731, which sought to strengthen the program and require all high school students to take the college-prep courses, unless they “opted out,” with parental approval, for courses aimed at vocation or a community college technical degree. Currently, students wanting to take a college-prep course of study must “opt in” to it.

The Senator’s bill failed to pass out of the Senate Education Committee, and he later pursued his objective, with some success, with the Joint Committee to Develop a Maser Plan for K- University Education. One of the Master Plan recommendations relates to the establishment of “a rigorous curriculum that prepares all students for the full range of life choices after high school, especially successfully entering the workforce and/or college.”]

SB 778                      (Ortiz)                      Biomedical Research and Development Act

This bill would enact the Biomedical Research and Development Act, authorizing the issuance of bonds in an unspecified amount for purposes of financing a specified biomedical research and development program.

The bill establishes a Biomedical Research Account and a Biomedical Research Facilities Account, into which money from the sale of the bonds would be deposited. Funds in the first account would be used to award grants and make loans to public or private research companies, universities, institutes, and organizations for biomedical research and development. Funds in the second account would be used to construct biomedical research facilities.

Introduced:               February 21, 2003

Return to Archive List

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

February 24, 2003

CAPITOL NEWS

1.       Legislative Analyst Releases Analysis of Governor’s Budget. The Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) issued its long awaited documents on the 2003-04 state Budget last week. The Analysis of the 2003-04 Budget Bill provides an overview of crosscutting departmental issues in transportation, resources, health and social services, judiciary and criminal justice, general government, capital outlay--and most importantly, education. The 2003-04 Budget: Perspectives and Issues presents the state fiscal picture and provides perspectives on the economy, demographics, and state revenues, and addresses the state’s fiscal problems. Both documents can be accessed on the LAO website: http:/www.lao.ca.gov

Highlights: In general, the LAO estimates that “the Governor’s budget proposal, if fully adopted, would eliminate the multibillion dollar budget shortfall facing the state in 2003-04,” stressing that achieving fiscal balance would require “virtually all elements of the plan be adopted and realized.” The LAO also predicts “a somewhat earlier and stronger economic recovery than does the administration.”

Interestingly, the LAO takes a bifurcated view of proposed student fee increases, supporting the significant increase (from $11 to $24 per unit) for the California Community Colleges, but not wholly recommending the Governor’s proposed fee increases for the University of California and the California State University systems. The LAO recommends a 15% rather than a 25% increase in undergraduate fees (but no change in the Governor’s proposed 20% increase for graduate students.) The LAO also recommends that the Legislature adopt an explicit fee policy requiring annual adjustments that are gradual and predictable. (Assembly Member Manny Diaz - D, San Jose, has introduced such a bill, AB 550, described in Legislation of Interest, below.)

With respect to the Community College fee increase, the LAO believes that “the level of the proposed CCC fee--which would remain the lowest in the nation--is reasonable,” and notes that “all needy students are not required to pay fees at CCC, and many middle-income students can offset their fees through federal tax credits.”

The LAO and the Governor disagree on the rate of enrollment growth projected for the CSU. The Governor projects 7%, while the LAO sees a more modest 4%.

In an unprecedented action, the LAO recommends that the Legislature approve the CSU capital outlay budget as proposed. However, that recommendation is tempered by another that would require CSU to fully utilize existing instructional space during the summer--essentially moving campuses to year-round operations--before requesting new instructional space. The CSU developed a five-year plan in 2001 to convert all campuses to Year Round Operations (YRO). Given the cost and complexity, the process is slow and cumbersome: Conversion to state-supported YRO has been completed for 16 of the 23 campuses thus far. Northridge was scheduled to convert last year, but the budget crisis has delayed conversion possibly to 2005-06, depending on how soon the state’s fiscal picture improves.

2.       The California State University system’s bond ratings were downgraded in January by Standard & Poor’s, from A+ to A.   The rating applies to the $821 million in outstanding bonds. The reasons cited by the agency include the system’s “dependence on the state of California for operating support amid the state’s worsening financial condition,” and “expectations that budget cuts facing the system will be worse than those in the current fiscal year.”   Fitch and Moody, the other major rating agencies, have not followed suit--yet.

3.       A bipartisan group has emerged to address the state budget crisis. Assembly Members Keith Richman (R - Northridge) and Joe Canciamilla (D - Contra Costa) have pulled together nine of their colleagues (four Republicans and five Democrats) to come up with a solution to the state’s budget mess. The group hopes to move beyond the current partisan bickering, which has led to a stalemate on the issue of tax increases, with Democrats seeing them as part of the solution and Republicans considering them an exacerbation of the problem. The group hopes to come up with a process that will lead to a methodical review of the effectiveness and cost of each state program, review current tax breaks and exceptions, and consider new methods, such as “zero-based budgeting” where expenditures must be justified, rather than the current system which bases funding on past budgets with inflationary increases.

A sign that the task won’t be easy: One of the lawmakers who helped organize the group, Robert Pacheco (R - Walnut) has declined to participate any further on the grounds that the group may be seen as usurping the party leadership (Assembly Speaker Herb Wesson and Republic Minority leader Dave Cox). Given that oxymoron, Mr. Pacheco’s participation may not be missed.

4.       San Francisco Mayor, and former Assembly Speaker Willie Brown has lost his campaign to become the next CalPERS president. The California Public Employees Retirement System is the largest in the country, counting 1.3 million state and local government and higher education employees among its members, and having $133 billion in investments. Because of its size, CalPers has enormous clout in the financial world. Brown, whose candidacy was supported by Governor Davis, lost to labor leader Sean Harrigan on a vote of 8 - 4. Harrigan is Vice President of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union. He will replace Dr. William Crist, Professor of Economics at Cal State Stanislaus, who was first elected to the CalPers Board in 1987, and is retiring after serving as president for 11 years.

5.       States in Crisis. The National Conference of State Legislatures recently released the results of a survey of state budgets, covering 2003 actual and 2004 projected expenditures/revenue. Thirty-nine states responded, with three of those reporting the information was not yet available for 2004. Eight states did not respond. Of the thirty-six responding with data for FY2004, eighteen projected deficits in double digit percentages. Interestingly, California’s deficit, when seen as a percentage of the state’s budget, did not top the list. Alaska achieved that dubious rank. In descending order, here are the eighteen states projecting the largest deficits as a percentage of their 2004 budgets:

·         Alaska        36%

·         California        30%

·         Arizona        25%

·         New York        24%

·         New Jersey        18.5%

·         Kansas        16.7%

·         Maine        16.3%

·         Wisconsin        16%

·         Illinois        15.8%

·         Minnesota        15%

·         Missouri        15%

·         North Carolina         14%

·         Michigan        14%

·         Massachusetts         13%

·         Nebraska        13%

·         Connecticut        12.7%

·         Texas        12%

·         Oregon        10.7%

The National Conference of State Legislatures also tracked how states were addressing their FY2003 and projected FY2004 deficits. Implementing cuts in state agency spending was reported by 29 of the 38 states responding. The second and third most frequently cited reductions: Higher education and Medicaid, respectively.

6.       Friday, February 21 was the last day lawmakers could introduce bills. Both the Assembly and the state Senate got off to a slow start this session, having introduced a total of about 600 bills from December 1 to February 14. In keeping with tradition, legislators kept the state printer busy during the last week leading up to the deadline: About 2000 bills were introduced during this 5-day period. Because of the large number, Legislative Update will publish more frequently to include reports on legislation of interest.

7.       One state Legislature with too much time on its hands. The Wyoming state Legislature recently defeated HR 171, a bill seeking to declare chocolate chip as the official state cookie.

*     NEW LEGISLATION OF INTEREST     *
Note: Bills must be in print for 30 days before they can be heard by a committee.

AB 424                      (Richman)                      Commission to Revise Repealed Parts of the Education Code

This bill seeks to repeal large portions of the Education Code relating to the authority of the state Superintendent of Public Instruction, and to a lesser extent, the Secretary of Education, governing childcare and development services and elementary and secondary education.

The bill would establish a 15-member commission to revise the repealed sections (and in fact restricts the commission to address only those topics specified above). Members would be appointed as follows:

·         Governor and Superintendent of Public Instruction: Each appoints 3 members.

·         Chairs, Assembly Education and Senate Education Committee: Each appoints 1 member.

·         Vice Chairs, Assembly Education and Senate Education Committees: Each appoints 1 member.

·         State Board of Education, Speaker of the Assembly, Senate Committee on Rules, and the Secretary for Education: Each appoints 1 member.

·         The Superintendent of Public Instruction would be the 15th member, serving in an ex officio capacity.

The commission may appoint advisory committees as needed. The bill requires that the commission submit a recommended revised version of the Education Code to the Legislature, the Governor and the State Board of Education on or before January 1, 2005.

The bill requires the Legislative Counsel, Legislative Analyst, State Department of Education and the Department of Finance to assist the commission--and to absorb any costs from within existing resources.

Introduced:              February 14, 2003

AB 442                      (Richman)                      School Finance Budget Disclosures

This bill would require the governing board of a school district to provide to the public a summary of the budget plan and an itemized statement of all proposed expenditures of the school district, and to distribute that summary at public hearings where the budget will be discussed.

Introduced:               February 14, 2003

AB 488                      (Parra)                   Sex Offenders: Campus Disclosures

This bill seeks to revise state law to provide that campus law enforcement (or, if the campus has no police department, local law enforcement), release to members of the campus community information regarding the presence of sex offenders on campus. The provisions specifically include the University of California, the California State University and the California Community Colleges within the definition of “school campus.”

Introduced:              February 14, 2003

AB 491                      (Diaz)                      California State University: Adequate Funding

This bill expresses the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation that will ensure adequate funding for the instructional and student service institutional programs of the California State University.

[Note: The Governor’s Budget proposes a 20% reduction in Student Services funding and a $142.8 million cut in the CSU’s base budget for all programs and services. Assembly Member Diaz’s bill is a “spot bill,” a placeholder for content to be added later, the specifics of which will depend on how many of, and/or to what degree, the Governor’s proposed budget reductions will be sustained after the Budget Committees have met, and the “May Revise” of the Governor’s Budget has been issued.]

Introduced:              February 14, 2003

AB 550                      (Diaz)                      Public Postsecondary Education: Student Fee Policy

This bill would provide that the UC Regents and CSU Trustees bear the primary responsibility for adjusting mandatory systemwide resident student fees at their respective systems. The bill would require both systems to develop methodologies for the adjustment of fees in accordance with certain principles, chief among which is that resident student fees should be gradual, moderate and predictable, and imposed with adequate notice.

The bill also states that as changes in resident student fees and financial aid resources are considered, the state should have an understanding of the impact on both current and prospective students, and employ efforts to mitigate any negative effect on financially needy students.

Introduced:              February 18, 2003

AB 554                      (Daucher)                      Community Colleges: Nonresident Student Tuition Fees

This is a “spot bill,” a placeholder for content to be inserted later, relating to student fee policies at the California Community Colleges.

Introduced:              February 18, 2003

AB 593                      (Ridley-Thomas) Voter Registration

This bill seeks to require the Secretary of State to perform certain administrative duties to facilitate voter registration--among which is to provide voter registration forms and information to students in all high schools, community colleges, and campuses of the California State University and the University of California.

[Note: The Secretary of State already provides the forms and information to these entities. Cal State Northridge typically receives 5000 registration forms, which are distributed to students at Freshman Orientation, at campus voter registration drives, and stacked at sites on campus having heavy foot traffic--e.g., Student Union, University Library, Bookstore, and Student Housing.]

Introduced:              February 18, 2003

ACR 26                      (Garcia)                      National Volunteer Week

This Assembly Concurrent Resolution proclaims the week of April 27 through May 3, 2003, as National Volunteer Week of 2003, and specifies the theme for the Week to be “Celebrate the American Spirit--VOLUNTEER!”

The bill resolves that the Assembly and the Senate extend their gratitude to the “thousands of community volunteers throughout the state for their valuable gifts of service,” and asks the Chief Clerk of the Assembly to transmit copies of the resolution to the author for appropriate distribution.

Introduced:              February 14, 2003

ACR 32                      (Richman)                      California Nonprofits and Philanthropy Week

This Assembly Concurrent Resolution proclaims March 30 to April 5, 2003 as Nonprofits and Philanthropy Week. The bill resolves that the Legislature recognizes the importance and value of nonprofit and philanthropic organizations, and asks the Chief Clerk of the Assembly to transmit copies of the resolution to the author for appropriate distribution.

Introduced:              February 14, 2003

SB 231                      (Murray)                      Genetic Services Advisory Committee

This bill seeks to require the Director of Health Services to appoint a Genetic Services Advisory Committee with an unspecified number of members, consisting of the following:

·         One or more individuals affected by a genetic disorder or parents of such individuals;

·         Advocates for women and childbirth issues;

·         Health care providers specializing in clinical genetics, pediatrics, obstetrics, molecular biology, cytogenetics, and biochemical genetics;

·         Representatives of hospital administration, the insurance industry, the biotechnology industry, and genetic counseling; and

·         Professional organizations representing physicians and registered nurses.

The committee would meet at least annually and review genetic services programs conducted under the Hereditary Disorders Act or those regulated by the Department of Health Services, and would be required to report to the Legislature and Governor annually on or before October 30, with respect to all of the following:

·         The availability and utilization of genetic services;

·         The quality of services provided;

·         The cost and funding of services; and

·         The need to discontinue or add additional services or improve the quality, quantity, and distribution of services or provider reimbursement.

The bill provides that the activities of the committee be supported by fees in the Genetic Disease Testing Fund, and also specifies that the Committee staff include at least one full-time position. Funding for the position would be supported by a 25-cent increase in the above referenced fees, commencing January 1, 2004.

Introduced:              February 14, 2003

SB 279                      (Chesbro)                      Student Fee Waivers - Extension of Sunset Date

Existing law requires CSU and UC tuition and fees to be waived for surviving children of firefighters and law enforcement personnel employed by public agencies, or who were employed as a contractor or as an employee of a contractor, performing services for a public agency, who have been killed in the performance of duty.

As initially written, in a bill authored by Senator Chesbro in 1999, the law is scheduled to sunset on January 1, 2004. This bill would extend the benefit indefinitely.

[Note: The impetus for this bill is rooted in a situation that developed in 1999 at Humboldt State University. Calder Johnson, an entering freshman, enrolled with the understanding that his tuition and fees would be waived, since he was the son of a man who was killed while fighting wildfires in Humboldt County in 1987. However, because the elder Johnson was a civilian pilot working under contract for the Department of Forestry, and was not a public employee, his son was ineligible for the waivers.

Without the waivers, the son could not afford to pursue his college education and his ultimate goal of becoming a doctor. The press got wind of the story, and it was featured in every major newspaper in the state. In the resulting outcry, a local family in Humboldt stepped forward and provided the son with money from its family trust to support his education while he was enrolled at Humboldt State.

Senator Wes Chesbro (R - Humboldt) subsequently introduced a bill to extend the spirit of the law to the letter of the law, thus preventing situations similar to Calder Johnson’s from developing in the future. In order to ensure passage of that first bill, however, he had to insert a sunset date--which the Senator’s current bill seeks now to delete.]

Introduced:              February 18, 2003

Return to Archive List

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

February 14, 2003

CAPITOL NEWS

1.       Great News. Congress finally approved a spending plan for FY 2003. Two of the thirteen Appropriations bills were approved and signed by President Bush last fall, but bickering between the President and lawmakers and between Republicans and Democrats over the remaining eleven bills continued with no resolution. The federal fiscal year runs October 1st to September 30th.   In the absence of an approved budget, Congress passed “Continuing Resolutions,” which kept the government funded at current levels. (Unlike California, the federal government has no Constitutional mandate to pass a budget by a certain deadline.)   In January, the eleven bills were wrapped into one Omnibus bill, and it was that legislation that was passed finally yesterday--and which President Bush indicated he would sign.

Included in the Omnibus bill was a request to fund a special CSUN project: “Uploading for Entertainment Engineering”--which seeks to develop and implement a new interdisciplinary entertainment-engineering curriculum, in response to the changing industry standards and revolutionary technological innovations.   The College of Arts, Media and Communication will receive $400,000 from the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE).

2.       President Bush issued his fiscal 2004 Budget this week. The Budget proposes $1.9 billion for Higher Education programs, a small decrease of $125 million over FY 2002. (At the time the 2004 budget was released, the FY 2003 Appropriation bills had not been passed, so there was basis of comparison to 2003.) Most of the reduction can be traced to a slashing of money for FIPSE (Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education). The Budget provides the program only $39 million, down from $181 million in 2002.

Areas that show increases over FY 2002:

Aid for developing Hispanic-Serving Institutions: $12 million increase (from $86 to $98 million);

International education and foreign language studies: $5 million increase (from $98 to $103 million);

Teacher quality enhancement: $2 million increase (from $88 to $90 million).

Areas remaining at FY 2002 funding levels:

Federal Trio Programs (at $803 million)

GEAR UP (at $285 million)

Byrd Honors Fellowships (at $41 million)

Graduate Assistance in areas of national need (at $31 million)

Student financial aid fared slightly better: The President proposed an increase of $2.2 billion over FY 2002 to $14.5 billion, with most of the additional money going to the Pell Grant Program. Although the maximum level remains at the current $4000 level, the Budget provides a significant increase to retire the shortfall that arose in 2002-03 from unexpected growth in the number of applicants for the Grants. While the increase is clearly good news, the President’s Budget also predicts a substantially lower growth rate in the number of future applicants, which could mean the deficits will be back.

The President’s Budget notes that between 2000-2002, the number of Pell Grant recipients increased by nearly 25%, compared with a 5% growth rate from 1997-99. However, due to increased efforts to reduce erroneous payments, the Budget presumes a slower growth rate in 2003-04 and 2004-05 of 2% and 1.5% respectively. (The IRS will be matching income data on student aid applications with the applicant’s tax data, to ensure that the students won’t receive more than what they are eligible for.)

The Pell Grant maximum has long been an issue of debate. Past increases have ranged from $100-$300 annually in recent years. In keeping with that slow pace, lawmakers sought last year to raise the maximum to $4100, while Higher Education associations have proposed doubling it to $8000.

Level funding has been proposed for the following financial aid programs:

Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants (at $725 million)

Work Study (at $1.01 billion)

Perkins loans cancellations (at $68 million)

Elimination of funding has been proposed for the following two programs:

Leveraging Educational Assistance Partnership (LEAP) - $67 million provided in FY 2002

Federal capital contributions for Perkins loans - $102 million in FY 2002.

Overall, proposed funding for Education (K-12 and Higher Education) is up 2.1%--increasing by $1.3 billion to $61.2 billion.

3.       Recasting Prop. 13.   Senator Martha Escutia (D - Whittier) has introduced a bill that would modify the famous property tax initiative. Prop. 13 doesn’t distinguish between commercial and residential property. Annual increases in the assessed taxable value of real property are generally limited to 2% of the property’s adjusted base year value. The property is only reassessed at full cash value when it is sold to a new owner. Residential property changes hands fairly regularly, but commercial property doesn’t. Escutia’s bill, SB 17, would provide that commercial and industrial real property be reassessed when a cumulative 50% of the ownership shares change hands.

Similar “split roll” bills have been proposed in the past, but none has ever left the House in which it was introduced, let alone the Legislature. Escutia’s bill may be given a closer look, however, given the state’s gaping deficit--and the results of a report recently issued by the Center for State and Local Taxation at the University of California, Davis.   As reported in the current issue of California Journal: “The report found that in Los Angeles County alone, the difference between assessed value and market value of commercial properties led to a loss in tax revenue of roughly $840 million in 2002. Since LA County is about 25% of the statewide property tax base, the report figures the statewide loss to be about $3.35 billion.”

*     NEW LEGISLATION OF INTEREST     *
Note: Bills must be in print for 30 days before they can be heard by a committee.

AB 307                      (Maddox)              Cal Grant National Guard Awards

This bill would establish the Cal Grant National Guard Award Program. It would require that, commencing with the 2004-05 academic year, Cal Grant NG awards would be made to qualifying members of the Army National Guard and the Air National Guard for full-time study or student loan repayment in an amount equivalent to the sum of the annual educational fee and annual registration fee charged to California resident undergraduate students at the University of California.

Introduced:              February 7, 2003

SB 187                      (Karnette)                      Teacher Preparation: District Interns

Currently, district interns receive their professional credential after completing an approved teacher preparation program, whereas interns completing an approved teacher preparation program at a university receive a preliminary credential, which enables them to teach. However, they do not receive their professional credential until they have completed a teacher induction program, which involves additional coursework, workshops, mentoring experiences and the like. The actual content of the program differs from school district to school district. SB 187 would require district interns also to complete a teacher induction program in order to receive their professional credential.

Introduced:              February 12, 2003

SB 193                      (Murray)                      Student Athlete Rights

This bill states the intention of the Legislature to enact legislation regarding the rights of student athletes at postsecondary educational institutions.

[Note: This is a “spot bill,” a place-holder for content relating to the stated topic that will be inserted later into the legislation. In this instance, Senator Murray has been mulling over issues regarding student athletes and compensation for the past year. It is his belief that athletes should be compensated in some way for their efforts, and that the current system is unfair because it allows coaches to generate outside income from apparel contracts and appearance fees, but disallows athletes from participating in these opportunities. These issues extend beyond the boundaries of California. The National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA), for example, plays a major role in college athletics, and would generally be beyond the reach of state legislation.

Senator Murray has asked CSU (and presumably UC) campuses with Division I programs, to provide data on athletic revenues. With the results of this data, he will be able to draft content for his bill--if for no other purpose than to bring light to the issue. Cal State Northridge does not have any coaches generating outside income from commercial endorsements.]

Introduced:               February 12, 2003

Return to Archive List

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

February 3, 2003

CAPITOL NEWS

1.       Budget Update. The Legislature is still grappling with the mid-year reductions proposed by the Governor in the current year budget. It’s expected that both houses will have approved their respective versions of the revised 2002-03 Budget by the end of next week, with the final document going forward to the Conference Committee by the start of the following week to reconcile differences.

By the end of February/early March, the Legislature will be focusing its attention on the 2003-04 Budget, which proposes reductions of even greater size and magnitude. Every entity being cut will be contacting lawmakers pleading to be spared. For each restoration, though, a new or deeper cut will be sliced somewhere else. In mid-March, all 23 campuses of the California State University system will be sending delegations to Sacramento to defend against any further reductions to the CSU Budget. The CSU presence in the state Capitol is part of the system’s Annual Alumni Legislative Day program, now expanded to two days.

In other developments, the CSU Board of Trustees this week discussed the Governor’s proposal to raise student fees beyond the 10% and 15% increases for undergraduate and graduates, respectively, approved by the Board in December. The Governor’s proposal seeks to increase undergraduate fees by 25% and graduate fees by 20%. No action was taken, since the Legislature will be taking the 2003-04 Budget through numerous iterations over the next several months. The final document may look very different from the one proposed by Governor Davis. The Constitutional deadline by which the Budget must be approved is July 1--a deadline that more often than not has been ignored. Several lawmakers have commented that a budget before September would be a miracle.

2.       Students face tuition hikes at SUNY campuses. The Board of Trustees of the State University of New York is proposing to raise undergraduate tuition for resident students by a whopping 41%, from $3,400 to $4,800 per year. The last tuition increase for SUNY students occurred in 1995--with the result that enrollment dropped 5 percent over the subsequent two years. As reported in the New York Times, past tuition increases in the SUNY system, the largest state university system in the nation, have been followed by similar increases in the City University of New York (CUNY) system. Tuition for undergraduate CUNY students is currently $3,200.

Declines in state support and the stock market, the latter of which has produced substantial drops in endowment income, together with rising costs have led colleges and universities across the nation to raise tuition. The impact of tuition increases will be stronger in New York because the financial aid has also been reduced. California has not proposed cuts in its student financial aid programs--yet.

3.       Early Retirement Incentives. Three bills encouraging early retirement for state civil service employees have been introduced into the Special Session on the Budget. All three are authored by freshman Assembly Member Rudy Bermudez (D - Norwalk). AB 13a provides for two years service credit and one year age; AB 14a provides for two years service credit only; and AB 15a provides for two years service credit and two years age. Because of the calls I’ve received about this legislation, I want to note that all three bills specifically exclude university and school members of the Public Employee Retirement System (PERS).

4.       Appointment. Former Assembly Member Richard Katz, whose district covered the northeast San Fernando Valley (including the University up until the 1990 reapportionment), has been appointed Senior Advisor on Energy to Governor Gray Davis. The position is non-paying.

5.       U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics report shows California’s unemployment rate increased to 6.6% in December 2002. The increase is .5% over the previous year. The national rate is 6%. According to the Bureau’s report, the Western region--California, Oregon, Washington, Alaska and Hawaii--continues to experience the highest unemployment in the nation. The Midwest, at 5.2%, had the lowest regional unemployment rate.

6.       The Census Bureau has released updated data showing that California continues to be the most populous state in the union.   The state’s population stands at 35.1 million people, or 12.2% of the U.S. total of 288.4 million. The second and third most populous states, respectively, are Texas with 21.8 million people and New York with 19.2 million. All three states together account for nearly a third of the total U.S. population.

7.       Memorable quotes. The first one comes from Assembly Member John Campbell (R - Irvine), who just began his second term in the state Assembly, and who is the Vice-Chair of the Assembly Budget Committee: “My biggest surprise has been how much we do with so little information. We really don’t know the full impact of what we’re voting on.”

The second quote is from Assembly Speaker Herb Wesson (D - Los Angeles), in response to the current partisan bickering over the size of the budget deficit: “You have to picture two hurricanes. One is going 120 mph; the other is going 150 mph. Both of them are coming to California. They both will kill us.''

*     NEW LEGISLATION OF INTEREST     *

Note: Bills must be in print for 30 days before they can be heard by a committee.

AB 153                      (Calderon)                      Student Financial Aid: Eligibility

In 2001 the Legislature proposed and the Governor approved AB 540, which, under certain conditions, exempted undocumented alien students from paying nonresident tuition at the University of California, California State University, and California Community Colleges.

To qualify, the students must have attended high school in California for 3 or more years, graduated from a California high school (or the equivalent), registered at or attend an accredited institution of higher education in California not earlier than the fall semester/quarter of the 2001-02 academic year, and must file an affidavit with the higher education institution stating they have filed an application to legalize their immigration status. Under AB 540, these students were not eligible for financial aid, including federal and state aid or work-study.

AB 153 would make these students eligible to apply for, and participate in, all student aid programs.

Introduced:              January 21, 2003

AB 222                      (Corbett)                      Library Bond Act

This bill seeks to enact the California Reading and Literacy Improvement and Public Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act of 2004, for submission to the voters at the March 2, 2004 Primary Election. If passed by voters, an unspecified amount of General Obligation Bonds would be sold for the purpose of financing library construction and renovation, pursuant to a program administered by the State Librarian. [Note: The amount of bonds to be sold will be amended into the bill at a later date.]

The bill contains an Urgency clause, declaring that it is to take effect immediately upon the Governor’s signature.

Introduced:              January 29, 2003

AB 242         (Liu)                      Teachers

This bill seeks to enact several recommendations of the Joint Legislative Committee on Developing a K - University Master Plan, delivered to the Legislature in August 2002.

Among other things, the bill seeks to prohibit the Commission on Teacher Credentialing (CTC) from granting a waiver authorizing a teacher to be assigned to a teaching position outside of the authorization specified on the credential held by the teacher. The bill also would mandate the CTC to require teacher preparation programs to focus on (1) teaching children with diverse needs, ethnicities, nationalities, and languages; (2) teaching children with special needs; and (3) teaching in urban settings.

The bill also contains provisions relating to professional preparation for educators and child care personnel. With respect to public higher education, the bill provides, among other things, that the governing boards of the UC, CSU and California Community Colleges adopt policies regarding the appropriate balance of temporary and permanent tenure-track faculty.

[The full text of the bill can be read on the Senate website: http://www.sen.ca.gov

Click on “legislation,” and on the next screen type in the bill number.]

Introduced:              January 30, 2003

AJR 3                      (Horton)                      Reauthorization of the Higher Education Act of 1965: Student Financial Aid

This Assembly Joint Resolution would memorialize the Congress and the President of the United States to repeal a provision of the 1998 amendments to the federal Higher Education Act of 1965 that denies or delays access to financial aid based upon convictions for drug-related offenses.

Introduced:              January 22, 2003

HR 9                      (Firebaugh)         Arts Education Month

This House Resolution declares March 2003 Arts Education Month and encourages all educational communities to celebrate the arts with meaningful student activities and programs that demonstrate learning and understanding in the visual and performing arts.

Introduced:              January 16, 2003

SB 74                      (Torlakson)          State Property: Vending Machines

This bill seeks to require each vendor that operates or maintains a vending machine on designated state property to satisfy the requirement that at least 50% of the food and beverages offered at the vending machine meets the accepted nutritional guidelines, as defined.

“State property” is defined as including the California State University.

Introduced:              January 22, 2003

Return to Archive List

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

January 17, 2003

CAPITOL NEWS

1.       The shoe finally falls.   Governor Davis revealed his $96.4 billion 2004 Budget plan to the Legislature on Friday, and, as anticipated, the effects of the reductions and of new and increased taxes are wide-reaching and “frought with pain”--as the Governor addresses a state deficit that, with the exception of New York, exceeds the budgets of every state in the union.

The Governor projected the “funding gap” [deficit] at $34.6 billion, and proposed to close it essentially with $10.2 billion in midyear increased fees/taxes and program reductions in the current 2003 Budget (announced in December), and with an additional $24.4 billion of the same in the 2004 Budget. The Governor’s plan also included fund shifts and realignment of some State-local programs (shifting programs, with some funding to the counties).

The Governor additionally proposed $1.7 billion in loans and borrowing--the bulk of it from the State’s contributions to the Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) and the State Teachers’ Retirement System (STRS). The Administration will be exploring two options: (1) Taking advantage of currently favorable interest rates by pursuing legislation to authorize pension obligation bonds to fund the state’s budget year retirement obligations to the two retirement systems, or (2) entering into discussions with CalPERS and STRS Boards to explore the possibility of a loan, as a part of each system’s fixed-income investment portfolio, to pay the 2003-04 State employer contributions.

The Governor’s former three priorities, “Education, Education, and Education,” have been replaced with “Jobs, More Jobs and Even More Jobs.”   To this end, he called for accelerated construction of roads, schools, and housing, authorized by voter approval of bond measures last November.

The shoe fell hard on public higher education. The Governor proposed a 4.4% reduction ($300 million) for the University of California, a 12% reduction ($326 million) for the California State University, and a 10.5% reduction ($530 million) for the California Community College system. Increases in student fees were proposed for all three systems: At the UC, in-state undergraduate and graduate students would pay an additional $795 and $855 respectively, raising their total fees to $4,629 and $4,869, respectively. At the CSU, in-state undergraduates would see their fees rise 25%, or $394, to $1,968, and in-state graduate students would pay an additional 20% or $358, to $2082. (Out-of-state tuition was significantly increased last year.) These increases are in addition to the 10% increases approved in December. Hardest hit of all are the community colleges, where the Governor proposed raising fees more than double, from $11 per unit to $24 per unit.

Below is a summary of the General Fund reductions proposed by the Governor for the California State University:

·         $143 million in unallocated base reductions (delegating to the CSU the task of cutting programs to produce the amount required);

·         $58.1 million in academic and institutional support funding (e.g.: libraries, telecommunications, public safety)

·         $53.5 million in savings by increasing the student-faculty ratio from 18.9 to 1 to 19.9 to 1;

·         $53.2 million (a 20% reduction) from student services;

·         $13 million (a 50% reduction) in outreach;

·         $2 million through elimination of Cal Teach, the one-stop information referral and recruitment service for students considering teaching careers that was established in 1997;

·         $2 million through elimination of the bilingual teacher recruitment program;

·         $1.4 million (a 50% cut) in the Student Fellows Program (which is administered by the Center for California Studies at CSU, Sacramento, and which provides student interns to the Assembly, Senate, Judiciary and Executive branches of state government);

·         $450,000 reduction in public service program funding.

These reductions, in addition to the mid-year cuts of $152.3 million in the 2002-03 Budget, announced in December by the Governor, bring the total to $326 million.

Not included in the $326 million are unfunded compensation and health insurance cost increases, totaling $78.6 million.

On a more positive note, the Capital Outlay budget for all three systems of public higher education--the University of California, the California State University, and the California Community Colleges--remained intact. The CSU will receive $198.2 million, which includes $80.5 million from general obligation bonds for the continuing phases of three projects at three campuses, $111.5 million in general obligation bonds for five new projects at five campuses, and $6.2 million for minor projects at all 23 campuses

Despite the $326 million in cuts, including a 20% decrease in student services, the Governor’s Budget inexplicably proposes funds to cover enrollment increases at all three systems. CSU is slated to receive $105.8 million to support projected enrollment increases of 5% (16,056 FTE students) in 2003-04, and $45 million to partially fund the 10,500 students the system enrolled without funding in 2002-03.

2.       The Budget Minuet begins. Now that the Governor has presented his Budget, anyone affected by it (virtually every citizen in the state) and everyone with an opinion about it (the planet) will begin the annual “bow and curtsy” to secure the best position possible under the circumstances.

The first issue to be resolved is the actual size of the budget deficit. Legislative Analyst Elizabeth Hill announced this week that the Governor’s estimate of the shortfall, coming from the Department of Finance’s (DOF) analysis, is about $8.5 billion too high--although she did note that about $3 billion of that difference is rooted in the DOF’s more pessimistic assessment of revenues and spending.   Also affecting the numbers is the methodology employed--specifically, what constitutes a spending obligation. Hill included only the spending that is required by current law, while the DOF included obligations that the state might be expected to meet even if not required by law.

As an example, the Governor’s “partnership” agreement with the University of California and the California State University, made early in his term when there was a budget surplus, established minimum funding commitments for higher education support services. One of these was a 4% annual increase to the state General Fund base. Under the present circumstances, the Administration concluded it could not hold to this commitment, and thus included it as a cut in the two systems’ budgets. Hill did not include the reduction in her estimate because the increase is not required by statute.

The next issues that will be debated are the equities of the cuts themselves. It is unlikely, for example, that the reduction proposed for the Department of Corrections, 0.7%, will stand. Or that the proposed $8 million increase in the Legislature’s annual operating budget won’t face cynical public scrutiny.   The public employee unions will also take note of the Governor’s proposed elimination of 1,500 state workers, but not trim his own immediate staff of 86. Lobbyists for social services will also look askance at the lack of austerity in the Governor’s office and the Legislature, when monthly aid checks to the blind and low income elderly are cut by $49.

Finally, there is the philosophical issue revolving around the traditional differences between the two political parties. Republicans are standing firm against raising taxes, and Democrats are resisting cuts in healthcare and social service programs.   Meanwhile, the Governor is looking at new ways to generate more revenue, including “revenue sharing” plans with Indian casinos. (Since Indian tribes are sovereign nations, the state cannot tax revenues from their gambling enterprises.)

Legislative Budget Committees are already meeting; the special Session on the Budget called by the Governor in December is at work. The cacophony of voices will continue over the next four months, leading up to the next dreaded fiscal milestone: Presentation of the “May Revise,” the document that updates estimates of revenues and expenditures after the first 3 quarters of the fiscal year, replacing those contained in the Governor’s January Budget. That will be the time when the shoe really falls.

3.       Californians lead in the number of chairmanships held by a single state in the 2003 Congress. Despite the fact that California voters put Democrats in the majority in both houses of the state Legislature and in all of the statewide offices, and sent a Congressional Delegation with a majority of Democrats to Washington, the state still managed to secure five leadership positions in the new Republican-controlled Congress sworn in on January 6.

Rep. David Dreier (R - Covina) will continue to chair the House Rules Committee, and Rep. Bill Thomas (R - Bakersfield) will continue in his post as Chair of the crucial Ways and Means Committee.

Joining these two Congressmen are Rep. Duncan Hunger (R - Alpine), who is the new chair of the Armed Services Committee, Rep. Richard Pombo (R - Stockton), who successfully won appointment as Chair of the House Resources Committee, and Christopher Cox (R - Newport Beach), who was named Chair of the newly-established Select Committee on Homeland Security.

In addition, nine other Californians will continue to chair important subcommittees:

·         Rep. Jerry Lewis (R - Redlands) - Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense;

·         Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon (R - Santa Clarita) - Education and the Workforce Subcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness (which has jurisdiction over higher education and student financial aid);

·         Rep. Doug Ose (R - Woodland) - Government Reform Subcommittee on Energy Policy, Natural Resources and Regulatory Affairs;

·         Rep. Ed Royce (R - Fullerton) - International Relations Subcommittee on Africa;

·         Rep. Elton Gallegly (R - Oxnard) - International Relations Subcommittee on Europe;

·         Rep. Ken Calvert (R - Riverside) - Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power;

·         Rep. George Radanovich (R - Fresno) - Resources Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands;

·         Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R - Huntington Beach) - Science Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics; and

·         Rep. Wally Herger (R - Chico) - Ways and Means Subcommittee on Human Resources.

With respect to party leadership positions, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D - San Francisco) is the first woman Minority Leader in House history. Rep. Robert Matsui (D - Sacramento), whom she appointed to chair the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee for the 2003-04 election cycle, is the first Asian-American to serve in a high-level Democratic leadership position. Rep. Sam Farr (D - Carmel) will retain his position as Chair of the California Democratic Congressional Delegation.

On the Republican side, Rep. Christopher Cox (R - Newport) will remain as Chair of the Republican Policy Committee, and Rep. David Dreier (R - Covina) will remain Chair of the California Republican Congressional Delegation.

4.       State Assembly Committee Assignments. Several of the University’s service area legislators will serve on key committees in the 2003 Legislative Session:

Assembly Budget Committee:

Lloyd Levine (40th District, in which CSUN now resides)

Cindy Montanez (39th District - NE Valley)

Carol Liu (44th District - Pasadena)

Fran Pavley (41st District - Woodland Hills)

Assembly Member Liu additionally serves on and chairs the Budget Subcommittee #2 on Education Finance, which has jurisdiction over K - University budgets.

Assembly Education Committee (K- 12):

Carol Liu

Fran Pavley

Assembly Higher Education Committee:

Carol Liu (chair)

Other committee assignments of interest:

Assembly Appropriations Committee:

Fran Pavley

Assembly Arts, Entertainment, Sports, Tourism and Internet Media Committee:

Keith Richman (38th District - Santa Clarita)

Fran Pavley

Assembly Public Employees, Retirement and Social Security Committee

Lloyd Levine (vice-chair)

Senate Committee assignments have not been confirmed yet, and will be reported in the next issue of Legislative Update.

*     NEW LEGISLATION OF INTEREST     *
Note: Bills must be in print for 30 days before they can be heard by a committee.

AB 78                      (Reyes)                 K-12 Curriculum

Expresses the encouragement of the Legislature for K-12 curriculum to contain instruction on the Vietnam War and the role of the Hmong people in that war. Additionally expresses the encouragement of the Legislature that the instruction include a component drawn from personal testimony of Hmong people who were involved in the Vietnam War and those men and women who contributed to the war effort on the homefront.

Introduced:    December 23, 2002

AB 119                      (Horton)                      Public Postsecondary Education: Student Fees

Currently there is no student fee policy in state statutes governing the University of California and the California State University. (The state’s former policy sunset in 1996.) AB 119 seeks to re-establish a statutory policy by setting forth certain principles and restrictions. To wit, the bill would provide that

·         The UC Regents and CSU Trustees would be responsible for annually setting the student fees and for justifying to the Legislature and Governor any increases or decreases;

·         The state would bear primary responsibility for the cost of providing public postsecondary education;

·         The state make grants available to financially needy students to offset any increases;

·         Any necessary increase in the mandatory student fees be gradual, moderate, and predictable;

·         Fees not be increased by more than 10% in an academic year or by more than 25% over a period of 4 consecutive academic years; and

·         Any fee increases be established, if possible, at least 6 months prior to the term in which they become effective.

The bill also authorizes the UC and the CSU to provide a variety of student fee payment options.

Introduced:    January 14, 2003

                    [Note: The California Postsecondary Education Commission (CPEC) has been working with representatives from all 3 systems of public higher education in California, as well as from statewide student associations and state agencies (such as the Student Aid Commission, Department of Finance and Legislative Analyst’s Office), to develop a new long-term student fee policy for the state’s public universities. The final recommendations will be included in legislation to be offered by Assembly Member Carol Liu (D - La Canada) within the next few weeks. Liu chairs the Assembly Higher Education Committee.]

ACA 6                      (Campbell)                      Expenditure Limit

This Assembly Constitutional Amendment seeks to place a cap on state expenditures--essentially prohibiting state spending from growing faster than population and inflation. The measure would also require any excess revenues resulting from a rebounding economy to be placed into a reserve, the contents of which, after reaching a certain level, would be allocated to education and rebates for taxpayers.

Introduced:   January 8, 2003

SB 40                       (Alpert)                      Reading, Literacy and Public Library Bond Act

Enacts the California Reading and Literacy Improvement and Public Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act of 2004, for submission to voters at the 2004 Primary Election (March 2).

If approved by voters, this bill would authorize the issuance of $2 billion in general obligation bonds for the purpose of financing library construction and renovation pursuant to a program administered by the State Librarian.

The bill contains an Urgency Clause, which means it would take effect immediately upon the Governor’s signature (rather than on January 1, 2004).

Introduced:    January 6, 2003

Return to Archive List