BILL ANALYSIS Ó
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
AB 202 (Brownley)
Hearing Date: 08/15/2011 Amended: 08/15/2011
Consultant: Jacqueline Wong-HernandezPolicy Vote: Education 8-0
_________________________________________________________________
____
BILL SUMMARY: AB 202 makes various changes to the state's
process for the determination and reimbursement of educational
mandates. This bill augments the reporting requirements placed
on the Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) with respect to
mandates filed by a local education agency (LEA).
_________________________________________________________________
____
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 Fund
Arbitration process Likely minor, possibly significant
ongoing costs General
Streamline LEA mandates Potential future costs; some offsetting
savings General
Notifications / reports Minor to significant ongoing
workload General
_________________________________________________________________
____
STAFF COMMENTS: This bill meets the criteria for referral to the
Suspense File.
Existing law establishes a process to determine whether or not a
reimbursable state mandate is created and establishes a
procedure for local governmental agencies, including LEAs, to
file claims for reimbursement of these costs with the Commission
on State Mandates (CSM) that requires the Commission to hear and
decide upon each claim for reimbursement and then determine the
amount to be paid for reimbursement, adopt parameters and
guidelines to guide the payment of claims, and adopt a
reasonable reimbursement rate methodology (RRM). The CSM is
required to consult with the Department of Finance (DOF), among
other state officials, when adopting parameters and guidelines
for reimbursement.
AB 202 (Brownley)
Page 1
This bill implements changes to the state's process for the
determination and reimbursement of K-12 educational mandates,
with the intent of streamlining the process. Specifically, this
bill allows an LEA test claimant to designate another LEA for
the purposes of drafting the Parameters & Guidelines/Estimate of
Statewide Costs or for the purpose of negotiating an RRM. It
provides, on an LEA test claim, for one extension of 90 days in
addition to the initial 180 days allowed for the development of
a RRM. The bill also eliminates the ability of an LEA test
claimant or DOF to unilaterally end the development of an RRM
once that process starts. Instead, it provides for the RRM
process to be ended only upon a joint request of the parties.
Additionally, this bill requires that an RRM development
process, based on a LEA-filed test claim, that reaches its
deadline (or for which a joint request to end is submitted) will
be declared at impasse and will move to binding arbitration, as
specified. The Chief Executive Officer of the Fiscal Crisis and
Management Assistance Team (FCMAT) or his/her designee who is an
FCMAT employee will be the sole arbitrator, and is required to
mediate or arbitrate a draft RRM within 90 days.
According to the FCMAT, additional costs would depend on the
number of arbitration processes and the complexity of the issues
arbitrated. If the FCMAT were responsible for only one or two
per year, the FCMAT would be able to absorb the workload within
its existing resources. Should the number be higher, or increase
over time if seen as a more efficient way to settle the RRM, the
FCMAT would require additional staff or contract resources. To
the extent that this streamlines the determination process,
there would be workload savings to the DOF, LEAs, and the CSM.
Streamlining the LEA mandate claims and reimbursement process
would result in administrative savings, generally. It could,
however, also encourage more mandate claims if the process is
viewed as less onerous and more likely to result in a timely
reimbursement to LEAs or in a more favorable outcome for
claimants. To the extent that the process is more attractive, it
may cost the state more money in the future to pay additional
claims.
In addition to changing the claims process, this bill requires
the SCO to notify the Legislature, Superintendent of Public
Instruction, and the DOF if reimbursement claims on a mandate in
AB 202 (Brownley)
Page 2
any fiscal year, with an LEA-filed test claim, exceed the
statewide cost estimate by an amount in excess of 25% of that
estimate. It further requires the CSM to notify the fiscal and
education policy committees of each house of the Legislature
within 30 days if an LEA files a test claim based upon any
regulation alleged to contain a mandate. Any cost to implement
these additional requirements would likely be minor, and
consistent with the scope of existing duties for the entities.
This bill states Legislative intent for periodic re-examination
of statutes creating reimbursable state mandates and
recommendations on whether they should be amended, repealed, or
remain unchanged, and requires the LAO to include report
specified information to the Legislature regarding mandate
claims. These provisions are likely to result in minor to
significant workload increases at CDE, DOF, SCO, LAO, and CSM,
depending on the scope of the recommendations.