BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 132
Page 1
Date of Hearing: July 6, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Julia Brownley, Chair
SB 132 (Lowenthal) - As Amended: May 11, 2011
SENATE VOTE : 26-11
SUBJECT : School facilities: state planning priorities
SUMMARY : Requires the State Allocation Board (SAB), the
California Department of Education (CDE), and local governing
boards to consider state planning priorities in the construction
and modernization of school facilities. Specifically, this
bill :
1)Finds and declares the following:
a) State planning priorities are intended to promote
equity, strengthen the economy, protect the environment,
and promote public health and safety.
b) The quality and location of schools affect local land
use and transportation patterns, community vitality,
economic development and pupil outcomes.
c) The state makes a significant investment in the
construction and modernization of school facilities and to
ensure that this investment is consistent with state
infrastructure goals, it is essential that the state school
facility construction investment reflect state planning
priorities.
2)Requires, on or before July 1, 2012, the SAB to review the
guidelines, rules, regulations, procedures, and policies for
the construction and modernization of school facilities to
ensure that they reflect the state planning priorities and
requires the SAB to revise them as necessary.
3)Requires the governing board of a school district to consider
whether a new schoolsite or addition reflects state planning
priorities.
4)Requires the following standards developed by the CDE to
reflect state planning priorities:
a) Selection of schoolsites.
SB 132
Page 2
b) Design and construction of school facilities that are
educationally and appropriate and promote school safety.
5)Requires the state's five-year infrastructure plan to include
information, to be provided to the Governor by the CDE and the
SAB, on the extent to which all of the following are
consistent with state planning priorities:
a) Guidelines, rules, regulations, procedures, and policies
for the construction and modernization of school facilities
adopted by the SAB.
b) Site selection standards developed by the CDE for use in
the selection of schoolsites.
c) Standards developed by the CDE for use by school
districts to ensure that the design and construction of
school facilities are educationally appropriate and promote
school safety.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Requires, under the Leroy F. Greene School Facilities Act of
1998, the SAB to allocate to applicant school districts
prescribed per-unhoused-pupil state funding for construction
and modernization of school facilities, including hardship
funding, and supplemental funding for site development and
acquisition. (Education Code (EC) 17070.35)
2)Prohibits the SAB from apportioning funds to any school
district unless the applicant school district has certified to
the SAB that it has obtained the written approval of the CDE
that the site selection and the building plans and
specifications comply with the standards adopted by the CDE.
(EC 17070.50)
3)Requires a governing board of a school district to, prior to
commencing the acquisition of real property for a new
schoolsite or an addition to an existing schoolsite, evaluate
the property at a public hearing using the site selection
standards established by the CDE. Authorizes the governing
board to direct the district's advisory committee to evaluate
the property pursuant to those site selection standards and to
SB 132
Page 3
report its findings to the governing board at the public
hearing. (EC 17211)
4)Requires the CDE to establish standards for use by school
districts in the selection of schoolsites and standards for
the design and construction of school facilities that are
educationally appropriate and promote school safety. Requires
the CDE to advise a governing board on the acquisition of new
schoolsites and review plans and specifications for school
buildings. (EC 17251)
5)Specifies state planning priorities, which are intended to
promote equity, strengthen the economy, protect the
environment, and promote public health and safety in the
state, including in urban, suburban, and rural communities.
(Government Code (GC) Section 65041.1)
6)Requires the Governor to, in conjunction with the Governor's
proposed budget, annually submit a proposed five-year
infrastructure plan to the Legislature. Requires the plan to
identify new, rehabilitated, modernized, improved, or
renovated infrastructure requested by state agencies for the
five years, including infrastructure needs for kindergarten
through grade 12 public schools. (GC 13102)
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, the requirements for the SAB and the CDE to revise
rules and regulations and standards are within the normal
functions of the SAB and the CDE and could be absorbed within
existing resources. To the extent that the SAB and the CDE
change the rules, regulations, and standards, there could be
potential costs to local school districts and cost pressure to
state bond funds.
COMMENTS : State planning priorities . Existing law requires the
Governor to prepare, regularly review, and revise a
comprehensive State Environmental Goals and Policy Report. The
Report is required to contain an overview of state growth and
development and a statement of approved state environmental
goals and objectives looking 20 to 30 years ahead, and a
description of new and revised state policies, programs and
other actions of the executive and legislative branches required
to implement statewide environmental goals. Existing law also
requires any revision to the Report to provide goals that are
consistent with state planning priorities, which are intended to
SB 132
Page 4
promote equity, strengthen the economy, protect the environment,
and promote public health and safety in the state, as follows:
To promote infill development and equity by
rehabilitating, maintaining, and improving existing
infrastructure that supports infill development and
appropriate reuse and redevelopment of previously
developed, underutilized land that is presently served by
transit, streets, water, sewer, and other essential
services, particularly in underserved areas, and to
preserving cultural and historic resources.
To protect environmental and agricultural resources by
protecting, preserving, and enhancing the state's most
valuable natural resources, including working landscapes
such as farm, range, and forest lands, natural lands such
as wetlands, watersheds, wildlife habitats, and other
wildlands, recreation lands such as parks, trails,
greenbelts, and other open space, and landscapes with
locally unique features and areas identified by the state
as deserving special protection.
To encourage efficient development patterns by ensuring
that any infrastructure associated with development, other
than infill development, supports new development that does
the following:
o Uses land efficiently.
o Is built adjacent to existing developed areas.
o Is located in an area appropriately planned
for growth.
o Is served by adequate transportation and other
essential utilities and services.
o Minimizes ongoing costs to taxpayers.
This bill requires the process of constructing new school
facilities and modernizing school facilities to reflect the
state planning priorities. Specifically, this bill requires
local governing boards to consider whether a new schoolsite or
addition to an existing schoosite reflects the state planning
priorities and requires the CDE to ensure that the standards for
site selection and school facility design and construction
reflect state planning priorities. This bill also requires the
SAB to review the guidelines, rules, regulations, procedures,
and policies of the SFP to ensure that they reflect the state
SB 132
Page 5
planning priorities.
School Facility Program (SFP) . The construction and
rehabilitation of public kindergarten through grade 12 (K-12)
and higher education facilities are funded by a combination of
state and local general obligation bonds, private funds, local
assessments, and in some instances, lease revenue bonds. SB 50
(L. Greene), Chapter 407, Statutes of 1998, established the SFP,
which governs the allocation of state education bond funds and
the construction and modernization of K-12 school facilities.
Since the inception of the SFP in 1998, voters have approved
$35.4 billion in state G.O. bonds for K-12 schools. The last
education bond on the statewide ballot was Proposition 1D, which
was passed by voters on the November 2006 ballot, and provided
$10.416 billion for K-12 and higher education facilities. The
SAB, a ten member board, is responsible for the allocation of
bond funds and developing regulations for the administration of
the SFP.
In order to be eligible for state education bond funds, the SFP
requires a local educational agency to evaluate a potential
schoolsite at a local governing board meeting and to receive
approval from the CDE to ensure that the selected site and
school specifications are safe and meet the school's education
plan. The CDE is required to provide advice to school districts
and develop standards by which school districts select the
location for new schoolsites and design facilities that ensures
that facilities are supportive environments for the
instructional program and are safe for students and staff.
Planning and siting schoolsites start at the local level.
Therefore, it is appropriate to for a local governing board to
consider whether a potential schoolsite meets state planning
priorities. This bill does not require a local governing board
to ensure that a schoolsite meets state planning priorities; it
simply requires a local governing board to consider the
priorities.
This bill requires the standards developed by CDE on siting new
schools and the standards for the design and construction of
school facilities to reflect the state planning priorities. The
bill, however, does not require the CDE to consider whether the
location of potential schoolsites are consistent with state
planning priorities. Staff recommends requiring the CDE to
consider state planning priorities in its review of potential
SB 132
Page 6
schoolsites.
The SAB is a ten-member body charged with allocating state
education bond funds and administering the SFP. The regulations
establish parameters for funding as specified by the SFP
statutes. It is unclear how the state planning priorities apply
to the SAB regulations, guidelines, rules, procedures and
policies, particularly for new construction of schools. Would
school districts be prohibited from siting a school in a
particular location because it does not meet the state planning
priorities? If CDE has approved a site, would that site go
through another level of review by the SAB? The author believes
that the area of regulations that will have the greatest effect
through the consideration of state planning priorities are funds
for the modernization of schools. According to the author's
office, regulations for modernization projects are restrictive
in the uses of the funds and prevent existing projects from
being updated to reflect modern educational needs. As such,
staff recommends striking the requirement for the SAB to ensure
that regulations for new construction projects reflect the state
planning priorities, and specifying that any changes to the
regulations, guidelines, and policies for modernization projects
must be in accordance with existing law. The Committee may wish
to consider whether amending the statutes governing authorizes
uses of modernization funds may be more effective than changing
regulations that must stay within the parameters of existing
law.
Five-year infrastructure plan . Existing law requires the
Governor to, in conjunction with the Governor's proposed budget,
annually submit a proposed five-year infrastructure plan to the
Legislature. The five-year infrastructure plan is intended to
identify new, rehabilitated, modernized, improved, or renovated
infrastructure requested by state agencies for five years,
including infrastructure needs for K-12 public schools to
accommodate increased enrollment, class size reduction, and
school modernization. This bill requires the five-year
infrastructure plan to include information provided by the CDE
and the SAB on the extent to which the guidelines, rules,
regulations, procedures, and policies for the construction and
modernization of school facilities, and the standards for
selection of schoolsites and design of school facilities are
consistent with the state planning priorities. Staff recommends
striking new construction to conform to the previous suggested
amendment.
SB 132
Page 7
Arguments in Support . The author states, "High quality schools
serve as the cornerstone of sustainable, healthy communities.
School quality and location affects local land use and
transportation patterns, community vitality, economic
development and, most importantly, student outcomes.
Unfortunately, schools are typically absent from
sustainability-oriented infrastructure and policy discussions.
Many state school facility policies are not structured to
support broader sustainable development objectives. In 2002,
the state created the State Planning Priorities to promote
infill development and equity, to protect environmental and
agricultural resources and to encourage efficient development
patterns. This bill will reflect the state planning priorities
in the state's school facility construction investment."
The Fresno Unified School District states, "Unfortunately,
schools are typically not included in sustainability-oriented
infrastructure and policy discussions. While Fresno Unified
School District has made it a policy that its facilities should
fit harmoniously into the community, many state school facility
policies are not structured to support broader sustainable
development objectives such as protecting the environmental and
agricultural resources and encouraging efficient development
patterns. SB 132 will begin the process of ensuring school
facility infrastructure investments achieve the goals of
community and economic vitality and environmental health."
Arguments in Opposition . The California Building Industry
Association opposes the bill and states, "SB 132 is a misplaced
measure that imposes new environmental regulations that are in
direct conflict with the purpose of the school facilities
program: to build schools where there is demonstrated need for
new classrooms. Furthermore, SB 132 mandates that the entire
body of regulations underpinning the state school facility
program (SB 50) be forced to integrate a set of land-use
priorities that are already appropriately applied through SB 375
and local land use planning. SB 132 conflates two separate
state objectives that are completely unrelated.
"Existing law allows for complaints to be filed against school
districts for noncompliance with site selection standards. SB
132 opens the door for private parties to mount legal challenges
against a school district by creating a new cause of action:
noncompliance with the state planning priorities."
SB 132
Page 8
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Advancement Project
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
California Advocacy Committee of the United States Green
Building Council
Fresno Unified School District
State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson
Opposition
California Building Industry Association
Analysis Prepared by : Sophia Kwong Kim / ED. / (916) 319-2087