Copyright© 2004 by School Services of California, Inc.

Volume 17                   For Publication Date: December 17, 2004             No. 24

 

Legislation Proposed to Clarify When the Chancellor’s Office
May Take Over the Fiscal Affairs of a District
 

Assembly Member Mervyn Dymally (D-Compton) is considering reintroducing legislation that clarifies the authority of the Community College Board of Governors (BOG) to authorize the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges to suspend the authority of the board of trustees of a local community college district and to appoint a special trustee to administer and oversee a district’s fiscal operations. Specifically, Assembly Member Dymally is proposing legislation that would outline the process to be followed prior to, the implementation of, such action.  

During the final days of the 2004 legislative session, Assembly Member Dymally amended AB 1507 to accomplish the following:  

1.      Require the Chancellor to review any plan prepared and adopted by a district regarding its financial condition and to determine whether these plans are adequate to achieve fiscal stability.  

2.      Authorize the Chancellor to take specific action in the event of a finding that the specified plans are inadequate.  

3.      Require that a hearing be held to provide the district an opportunity to respond to a BOG determination that its plans are inadequate.

4.      Provide that the BOG, upon a finding that a district has failed to maintain fiscal integrity and remains unable to manage its own recovery, may authorize the Chancellor to suspend, for up to one year, the authority of the members of the district’s governing board to exercise any powers, responsibilities, or official actions with respect to the management of the district and appoint a special trustee, at district expense, to serve at the pleasure of the Chancellor to manage the district.  

5.      Authorize the Chancellor’s Office, with the prior approval of the BOG, to renew the suspension as often as necessary.  

6.      Require the Chancellor, in addressing a district’s financial problems, to prepare and oversee an assessment of what led to the district’s fiscal crisis and an action plan for addressing deficiencies in the district’s services and procedures.  

7.      Clarify that the provisions of such legislation may not be construed to prohibit any otherwise qualified member of any community college district governing board, or otherwise qualified individual, from candidacy for a governing board elective office during the period of suspension.  

8.      Establish the effective date of these provisions as of January 1, 2008.  

AB 1507 was heard in by the Senate Education Committee in August 2004, shortly before the Legislature adjourned for the year. The bill was held in committee due to a lack of support. However, it is the intent of Assembly Member Dymally to introduce a new bill (with the same provisions) when the Legislature reconvenes for its 2005 legislative session.  

As you may recall, the Legislature enacted, and the Governor signed on July 13, 2004, legislation (AB 61/Chapter 139/2004) to respond to concerns regarding the Compton Community College District’s fiscal condition. This legislation provided specific authority to the Chancellor to appoint a special trustee to administer and oversee the Compton Community College District’s operations. The District filed a lawsuit against the BOG and Chancellor that challenged their authority to take over the operations of the District. That lawsuit was found to be in favor of the actions taken by the Chancellor, thus rejecting Compton ’s claim.  

Since then, the Chancellor’s Office recognized that existing Title V regulations were insufficient to address the type of problem that developed at the Compton Community College District. Revised regulations regarding the Chancellor’s authority to address severe fiscal problems have been developed and adopted by the BOG. Thus, concerns raised by the Governor in signing AB 61 have been addressed in the new regulations and essentially parallel the provisions being proposed in AB 1507 that will end up in a new bill, if pursued by Assembly Member Dymally.  

Therefore, in light of the existing regulatory provisions, legislation is not needed.

 

Arnold Bray