Copyright© 2002 by School Services of California, Inc.

Volume 15                   For Publication Date: December 6, 2002             No. 24

Legislature Wastes no Time Introducing Bills  

When the Legislature convened on December 2, 2002 it rang the bell for the introduction of legislation for the next two-year legislation session. During the short time the Legislature was in session December 2^nd they managed to introduce 119 bills.  

The Assembly Rules Committee adopted a policy that permits each assembly member to introduce no more than 40 bills (exceptions may be granted). If all 80 members of the Assembly introduce their maximum allocation of bills, at least 3200 pieces of legislation could go through the legislative process in the Assembly.  

Although no announcement was made, it is assumed that the Senate will impose a similar bill introduction limitation on its Senate members. Thus, the Legislature could process almost 5,000 bills over the next two years.   

Two bills were introduced on December 2^nd that have a direct impact on California Community Colleges. The following is a brief analysis of those bills:  

Senate Bill 6 (Alpert, D-Coronado) Public Education Governance  

This bill contains numerous provisions that would implement some of the recommendations of the Education Master Plan Review Committee. Most of the provisions of the bill apply to the K-12 system. However, the provisions that apply to community colleges would specify the system as a public trust (see September 20, 2002 Update, “Legislature Completes Work on Education Master Plan,” page 253).   

The Community College Board of Governors and local board trustees have publicly stated their concerns and opposition to the system becoming a public trust. As a result, the approval of this provision of SB 6 is in question.  

Specifically, SB 6 would mandate the following:  

• The California Community Colleges would be reconstituted as a public trust with its board of governors responsible for overall governance, setting system policy priorities, budget advocacy, and accountability for a multi-campus system.

• The Board of Governors shall accomplish all of the following: exercise general supervision over, and coordinate, the local community college districts; provide leadership and direction through research and planning; establish minimum conditions and standards for all districts to receive state support and to function within the system; establish specific accountability measures, and ensure evaluation of district performance based on those measures; approve courses of instruction and educational programs that meet local, regional, and state needs; administer state operational and capital outlay support program; adopt a proposed system budget and allocation process; ensure systemwide articulation with other segments of education; and represent the districts before state and national legislative and executive agencies.

• Every community college district shall be under the control of a board of trustees.  The governing board of each community college district shall do all of the following: establish, maintain, and oversee each college of the district; ensure that the district meets the minimum conditions and standards established by the board of governors; establish policies for local academic, operations, and facilities planning to ensure that the statutory mission is accomplished within the conditions and standards established by the board of governors; adopt local district budgets; oversee the procurement and management of the real property of the district; establish policies governing student conduct; and establish policies to guide new course development, course revision or deletion, and curricular quality.

• Provisions of SB 6 would change the composition of the board of governors from 16 to 20 members. The four additional members would be ex officio, as voting members of the Board, comprised of the Governor, the Lieutenant Governor, the Superintendent of Public Instruction, and the Speaker of the Assembly.

Assembly Bill 40 (Runner, R-Lancaster)  Equalization Adjustments

• This bill would require the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges to annually compute an equalization adjustment for the credit program general purpose apportionment of each community college district per full-time equivalent student (FTES) in credit programs. The bill would specify the computations to be made by the Chancellor to determine the statewide target amount per credit FTES for the 2003-04 fiscal year and in subsequent fiscal years.  The bill would require the Chancellor to allocate the funds appropriated for this purpose to each district for which the credit apportionment per credit FTES is less than the statewide target amount.

• The bill would require the Legislative Analyst’s Office to conduct a review of the progress of equalization funding by January 1, 2006 , and to report the results of this review in its Analysis of the Budget Bill for the 2006-7 fiscal year.

The bill contains language that specifies funding for these purposes should be included in the annual Budget Act. The bill does not include a specific appropriation. The likelihood of AB 40 being approved is slim to none due to the fiscal crisis facing the state.

 Both of the above bills may be heard in committee after January 6, 2003 . SB 6 will be heard in the Senate Education Committee and AB 40 in the Assembly Higher Education Committee (confirmed dates will be announced in future Updates).

— Arnold Bray