BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 216
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 216 (Swanson)
As Introduced January 31, 2011
Majority vote
HIGHER EDUCATION 8-0 APPROPRIATIONS 17-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Block, Achadjian, |Ayes:|Fuentes, Harkey, |
| |Brownley, Fong, Galgiani, | |Blumenfield, Bradford, |
| |Lara, Miller, Portantino | |Charles Calderon, Campos, |
| | | |Davis, Donnelly, Gatto, |
| | | |Hall, Hill, Lara, |
| | | |Mitchell, Nielsen, Norby, |
| | | |Solorio, Wagner |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Allows California Community Colleges (CCC) to receive
full funding for courses offered in correctional institutions.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Waives open course provisions for CCC courses offered in state
correctional facilities.
2)Provides that attendance hours generated by CCC credit
instruction in state, city, county or federal correctional
facilities shall be funded at the credit rate, hours generated
by non-credit instruction be funded at the non-credit rate,
and hours generated by instruction in career development and
college preparation funded at the established rate.
3)Prohibits CCC from receiving state funding for attendance
hours generated in any inmate education class for which the
CCC receives full compensation from another agency or private
source, and requires the offset of state aid for partial
compensation received from any such source.
4)Prohibits use of state funding for CCC inmate education to
supplant costs incurred by the California Department of
Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR).
EXISTING LAW prohibits CCCs from claiming state funding for
classes that are not open to the public; however, an exemption
is allowed for inmate education in city, county and federal
AB 216
Page 2
correctional facilities. Such courses are funded at non-credit
rates. Under the exemption, funding is not allowed for CCC
classes in state correctional facilities.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, ongoing General Fund (Proposition 98) cost pressure
for converting qualified existing courses to the full credit
rate at local and federal institutions. Additional costs would
depend on the number of full-time equivalent students (FTES)
taking classes in state correctional facilities and thus
eligible for apportionment funding under this bill. For every
100 for-credit FTEs, annual GF (Prop. 98) costs would increase
by $456,000. CCCs are limited to enrollment caps that arguably
would make this a zero sum change, but not all colleges are at
their caps, thus expanding access and funding rates creates
enrollment and funding pressure. Given the current funding
pressures and extensive over-enrollment at CCCs, it is unlikely
in the short-term that any enrollment impacts related to this
bill would increase CCC funding.
COMMENTS :
Purpose of this bill : According to the author, this bill seeks
to address the extraordinary difficulty that the formerly
incarcerated face upon release, due to a lack of education and
job skills. The author argues that existing law creates
disincentives for CCCs to offer credit courses and career
development courses in state prisons by not reimbursing them at
the rate appropriate with the type of course offered. The
author argues that the research is clear that inmates who
receive educational opportunities are much less likely to
recidivate, saving the state millions of dollars per year.
Prior legislation : AB 1702 (Swanson) of 2010 and SB 574
(Hancock) of 2009 were both identical to this bill. Both bills
were held in the Senate Appropriations Committee. SB 413
(Scott), of 2008, virtually identical to this bill, was vetoed
by the Governor.
Analysis Prepared by : Laura Metune / HIGHER ED. / (916)
319-3960
AB 216
Page 3
FN: 0000862