BILL NUMBER: AB 8 AMENDED
BILL TEXT
AMENDED IN SENATE JUNE 30, 2009
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY JUNE 1, 2009
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MARCH 26, 2009
INTRODUCED BY Assembly Member Brownley
(Coauthor: Assembly Member Smyth)
DECEMBER 1, 2008
An act to amend and repeal Section 42238.22 of, and to
add Section 41054 to , the Education Code, relating to
education finance.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 8, as amended, Brownley. Education finance: working group.
Existing
(1) Existing law establishes the
public school system in this state, and, among other things, provides
for the establishment of school districts throughout the state and
for their provision of instruction at the public elementary and
secondary schools they operate and maintain. Existing law establishes
a public school funding system that includes, among other elements,
the provision of funding to local educational agencies through state
apportionments, the proceeds of property taxes collected at the local
level, and other sources.
This bill would express findings and declarations of the
Legislature with respect to the school funding system in the state.
This The bill would require the
Director of Finance and the Legislative Analyst to convene a working
group to make findings and recommendations to the Legislature and the
Governor on or before December 1, 2010, regarding restructuring
California's school finance system. The bill would require those
findings and recommendations to include, among other things,
alternative structures for funding public schools, the policy and
fiscal implications of the alternative funding structure or
structures, and an evaluation mechanism to facilitate continuous
improvement, maximum transparency, and accountability of the funding
structures.
(2) Existing law creates the Santa Cruz High School attendance
area, a program for middle school options to eliminate revenue limit
inequities.
This bill would provide that these provisions would remain in
effect only until July 1, 2010.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: no.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares all of the
following:
(a) The 22 studies of the Getting Down to Facts Project and the
Governor's Committee on Education Excellence were consistent in their
conclusions that California's current education finance system is
overly complex, irrational, and burdensome, and is in need of a
long-term plan for comprehensive reform.
(b) The complexity of the current system poses a major obstacle to
transparency and effectiveness. It is almost impossible to determine
how much revenue each school district receives or how those revenues
are spent, let alone to report this information to local
communities, stakeholders, and the state.
(c) The current system is not logical, with district revenues that
are largely a historical artifact of spending in the 1970s combined
with a confusing and burdensome system of categorical programs.
Disparities in school and district revenues are substantial and are
not aligned to pupil or educator needs.
(d) The system places substantial restrictions on the use of
resources by schools and districts, creating high compliance costs
and making it difficult for local educators to respond to the needs
of their pupils. Fewer paperwork requirements and more flexibility in
allocating resources are cited by school principals as two of the
most important factors in improving pupil outcomes.
(e) Many schools and districts lack the proper tools or capacity
to ensure that money is spent on the most effective programs and
practices. Research consistently finds that successful schools use
data to inform teaching practices and innovation. However, California
schools and districts vary widely in their use of data and in their
capacity to use data to improve pupil performance.
(f) Ensuring that money is spent efficiently and effectively
requires a full understanding of how money is allocated by school
districts and spent within schools. However, California does not
collect financial data that is useful for determining the
effectiveness of resources at the state, district, or school levels.
(g) Therefore, it is the intent of the Legislature to do all of
the following:
(1) Build on previous research and recommendations to produce a
comprehensive plan for finance reform to support pupil achievement,
with specific consideration given to the interactions of incentives
in school finance formulas.
(2) Establish simpler formulas for allocating funding to each
local educational agency.
(3) Make the allocation of funding more rational and equitable so
that the revenues received by each local educational agency reflect
the actual cost of educating pupils with varying needs in varying
environments, so that all pupils are prepared, at the end of their
elementary and secondary education, for college, careers, and
successful participation in our democratic institutions, no matter
where they live or what their economic, racial, or ethnic background
may be.
(4) Support accountability by increasing the transparency of state
funding mechanisms and of expenditure decisions at the local level.
(5) Improve the reporting of financial data so that programmatic
investments can be linked to programs that increase pupil
achievement.
(6) Support continuous improvement by requiring periodic review of
the school finance system and of local resource decisions.
(7) Hold local educational agencies harmless, and transition to
the new system gradually, as new moneys become available.
SEC. 2. Section 41054 is added to the Education Code, to read:
41054. (a) The Director of Finance and the Legislative Analyst
shall convene a working group to make findings and recommendations to
the Legislature and the Governor regarding the implementation of a
restructured California school finance system as set forth in
subdivision (b).
(1) In addition to the Department of Finance and the Legislative
Analyst, the working group shall be composed of representatives of
the Governor, representatives of the Superintendent of Public
Instruction, and majority and minority staff of the appropriate
policy and fiscal committees of the Assembly and Senate.
(2) The working group shall consult with, or invite the
participation of, organizations or experts it deems appropriate to
accomplish its tasks.
(3) In its deliberations, the working group shall consider and
give appropriate weight to the sequence of recent research, findings,
and recommendations beginning with the Getting Down to Facts Project
and leading to the report of the Governor's Committee on Education
Excellence and other subsequent research papers and reports, and
shall draw upon, rather than repeat, those efforts.
(b) The working group shall make findings and recommendations
regarding all of the following:
(1) Alternative structures for funding public schools that shall
include, but not necessarily be limited to, all of the following
characteristics:
(A) Simple formulas for allocating funding to each local
educational agency.
(B) Rational and equitable allocation of funding so that the
revenues received by each local educational agency reflect the cost
of educating pupils with varying needs in varying environments,
including, but not necessarily limited to, pupils in poverty and
English learners.
(C) Predictability and stability of funding so that local
educational agencies can effectively plan for the future.
(D) Support for accountability by providing transparency of state
revenue allocation rules as well as expenditure decisions at the
local level.
(E) Facilitation of the reporting of financial data so that
programmatic investments can be linked to pupil achievement.
(F) Allocation of consistent additional resources to school
districts and county offices of education on the basis of exogenous
characteristics of the local educational agency and its
students pupils that research has shown clearly
affect the costs of educating pupils.
(G) Recognition of the financial consequences of growth or decline
in the number of students pupils
served.
(H) Reinforcement of the academic goals of the public schools.
(2) A means of transitioning from the current school funding
structure to the new structure or structures identified pursuant to
paragraph (1), only as increased funding becomes available in future
years. In particular, the findings and recommendations shall address:
(A) The conditions that should be in place before a transition
begins.
(B) The length of time that is necessary or appropriate to
transition to a new funding structure.
(C) The extent to which local educational agencies will be held
harmless during a transition from the current school funding
structure to the new system, if that transition is based only on new
funding.
(D) An equalization component for the transition to the new
funding structure, based on the characteristics identified in
subparagraphs (B) and (E) of paragraph (1).
(E) How and when to eliminate unnecessary statutory and budgetary
elements of the current school funding structure.
(3) The policy and fiscal implications of the alternative funding
structure or structures identified pursuant to paragraph (1). In
particular, the findings and recommendations shall address all of the
following:
(A) Costs associated with implementing new school funding
structures.
(B) Trade offs inherent among the characteristics set forth in
paragraph (1).
(C) Equity considerations.
(D) Incentives and disincentives that new school funding
structures may create or eliminate.
(E) Governance considerations.
(4) Modifications to the standardized account code structure to
provide school-level reports on revenue and expenditures to
facilitate easy comparisons across schools and districts, including
comparisons of school, district, and statewide demographics and
academic performance, and data on program-level expenditures.
(5) An evaluation mechanism to facilitate continuous improvement,
maximum transparency, and accountability of the primary funding
structures, as well as a consistent process to evaluate the
effectiveness of any specific programs that are funded separately.
(c) The working group shall present its findings and
recommendations to the Legislature and the Governor on or before
December 1, 2010.
(d) If the working group incurs any costs that the participating
entities determine that they are unable to absorb, those costs shall
be paid from nonstate funds donated or granted to pay them.
SEC. 3. Section 42238.22 of the
Education Code is amended to read:
42238.22. (a) There is hereby created in the Santa Cruz High
School attendance area, a program for middle school options to
eliminate revenue limit inequities in the per pupil funding for
instructional programs for pupils in grades 7 and 8. Participation is
limited to the Santa Cruz High School District, the Live Oak
Elementary School District, and the Soquel Union Elementary School
District. The purpose of the program is to encourage and enable these
elementary school districts in this attendance area to continue
providing a middle school program, in addition to the junior high
school program operated by the high school district, thereby
increasing enrollment options for all pupils in grades 7 and 8.
(b) In order for these elementary school districts to receive an
addition to the revenue limit pursuant to subdivision (g), these
districts shall do all of the following:
(1) Continue to participate in a consortium with the Santa Cruz
High School District.
(2) At a minimum, all pupils in grades 7 and 8 in the
participating districts shall be provided with the option to enroll
in either a middle school operated by the elementary school district
or a junior high school operated by the high school district.
(3) Provide evidence to the Superintendent that the amount
computed and allocated pursuant to subdivision (g) will be used only
for pupils in grades 7 and 8.
(c) Participation by the districts in the consortium shall be
voluntary.
(d) For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall
apply:
(1) "Junior high school program" means a departmentalized program
in which pupils in grades 7, 8, and 9 select classes based on subject
and move from classroom to classroom during the schoolday.
(1)
(2) "Middle school program" means a program in which
teachers teach a common core curriculum to the same group of pupils
in grades 6, 7, and 8 , and provide a transition from
self-contained classroom education at the elementary level to
subject-oriented, departmentalized classrooms at the high school
level.
(2) "Junior high school program" means a departmentalized program
in which pupils in grades 7, 8, and 9 select classes based on subject
and move from classroom to classroom during the schoolday.
(e) A school district shall not deny a request for enrollment made
pursuant to this section unless space is not available in the
selected school or unless the choice would have a negative impact on
an existing desegregation plan.
(f) The average daily attendance of pupils participating in the
enrollment option pursuant to this section and attending the
elementary school districts shall be credited to the elementary
school district of residence for purposes of determining state
apportionments and revenue limits. The average daily attendance of
pupils attending the high school district shall be credited to the
Santa Cruz High School District.
(g) For the 1990-91 fiscal year for the Live Oak Elementary School
District and each fiscal year thereafter, and for the 1991-92 fiscal
year for the Soquel Union Elementary School District and each fiscal
year thereafter, the Superintendent shall compute and allocate an
amount in addition to the revenue limit for each elementary school
district participating in the consortium, equal to the following:
(1) Calculate the average of the base revenue limits per unit of
average daily attendance of the districts participating in the
consortium.
(2) From the average base revenue limit calculated in paragraph
(1), subtract the base revenue limit of the elementary school
district per unit of average daily attendance.
(3) If the result in paragraph (2) is a positive number, then
multiply the result in paragraph (2) by the average daily attendance
of the elementary school district in grades 7 and 8. That amount
shall be added to the total revenue limit computed for that district.
If the result in paragraph (2) is zero, or less than zero, then no
adjustment shall be computed for the district.
(h) If the elementary school district ceases to participate in the
consortium, the adjustment computed in this section shall no longer
be provided to that district.
(i) This section shall remain in effect only until July 1, 2010,
and, as of January 1, 2011, is repealed, unless a later enacted
statute, that is enacted before January 1, 2011, deletes or extends
that date.