BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Alan Lowenthal, Chair
2011-2012 Regular Session
BILL NO: SB 1550
AUTHOR: Wright
AMENDED: April11, 2012
FISCAL COMM: Yes HEARING DATE: April 18, 2012
URGENCY: No CONSULTANT:Kathleen Chavira
SUBJECT : Community College Extension Courses.
SUMMARY
This bill requires, until January 1, 2019, the Chancellor's
Office of the California Community Colleges to establish a
voluntary, pilot program for purposes of selecting up to
eight community college campuses from eight different
community college districts to establish and maintain an
extension program offering career and workforce training
courses for credit at fee levels that cover the actual
cost, as defined, of maintaining these courses.
BACKGROUND
Current law authorizes the governing board of any community
college districts to establish contract education programs
within or outside the state by agreement with any public or
private agency, corporation, association, or any other
person or body to provide specific educational programs or
training to meet the specific needs of these bodies.
(Education Code § 78021)
Current law establishes the California Community Colleges
as a part of public higher education. Current law
establishes and differentiates the goals, missions and
functions of California's public segments of higher
education.
(Education Code § 66010)
Current law provides that the primary missions of the
community colleges are to offer academic and vocational
education at the lower division level for both recent high
school graduates and those returning to school. Another
primary mission is to advance California's economic growth
SB 1550
Page 2
and global competitiveness through education, training, and
services that contribute to continuous workforce
improvement. In addition, current law provides that
essential and important functions of the colleges include:
basic skills instruction, providing English as a second
language, adult noncredit instruction, and providing
support services that help students to succeed at the
postsecondary level. Community colleges are also authorized
to provide community service courses and programs so long
as their provision is compatible with an institution's
ability to meet its obligations in its primary missions. To
the extent funding is provided the colleges are authorized
to conduct institutional research concerning student
learning and retention as is needed to facilitate their
educational missions. (EC § 66010.4)
Current law requires the governing board of a local
community college district to admit any California
resident, (and authorizes them to admit any nonresident)
possessing a high school diploma or the equivalent and
authorizes the board to admit anyone who is capable of
profiting from the instruction offered, as specified. (EC §
76000)
Current law requires that community college students be
charged a per unit fee and statutorily prescribes the fee
level through the annual Budget process. Current law
exempts the student enrolled in noncredit courses and in
credit contract education courses, as specified, from these
fee requirements. Current law also exempts from these
requirements CSU and UC students enrolled in CCC remedial
classes, as specified, and provides for the waiver of these
fees for students who have financial need or meet other
specified criteria. (EC §76300)
ANALYSIS
This bill requires, until January 1, 2019, the Chancellor's
Office of the California Community Colleges to establish a
voluntary, pilot program for purposes of selecting up to
eight applicant community college districts to establish
and maintain an extension program offering career and
workforce training courses for credit.
Pilot Participant Selection
1) Authorizes the governing board of any community
SB 1550
Page 3
college district to apply to be selected by the
Chancellor's office.
2) Limits participation to eight campuses from eight
separate community college districts.
3) Requires the Chancellor, in selecting the campuses, to
consider all of the following:
a) Geographic, socio-economic, and demographic
diversity.
b) Labor-Market Demand.
c) The district's program and planning
capacity.
d) Potential support from funding
partners in industry, labor, or other private
funding sources to reduce cost of attendance for
participating students.
Requirements to be eligible to participate
4) Authorizes the Chancellor to review pilot programs,
monitor compliance with the provisions of the bill,
and grant the Chancellor's office the authority to
rescind authority to participate in the pilot if the
Chancellor determines that a campus or its district is
out of compliance with these provisions.
5) Requires a selected campus meet the following criteria
in order to be eligible to participate in the pilot
program:
a) Serve a number of students equal
to or beyond its funding cap for the two
immediately prior academic years, to be
determined as specified.
b) Have not received a stability
adjustment to state appropriations.
c) Meet transfer, basic skills, or
career technical education objectives for all
courses in the state-funded programs offered for
SB 1550
Page 4
credit.
d) Prioritize enrollment in the state
funded programs by promoting policies that both:
i) Prioritize enrollment
for fully matriculated students, as defined,
and for continuing students who are making
satisfactory progress toward a basic skills,
transfer or workforce development goal.
ii) Do not unfairly or
disproportionately shift students eligible
for resident tuition or who are eligible for
a fee waiver to courses offered under the
pilot program
e) Prohibits a district from
receiving a stability adjustment to apportionment
funding.
Extension Program Requirements
6) Requires a selected community college district to
comply with the following requirements in order to
participate:
a) Requires districts to minimize the
costs of administration of the pilot program to
the greatest extent possible.
b) Prohibits the pilot program
enrollment from being reported for state
appropriation but requires that enrollment be
open to the public.
c) Prohibits a governing board from
expending any general fund moneys to establish
and maintain these courses, and specifies that
these fees do not apply to fees generated in the
extension program.
d) Prohibits extension courses from
being offered at times, nor in locations that
supplant or limit offerings of state-supported
programs nor in conjunction with courses funded
SB 1550
Page 5
with state apportionments.
e) Requires each participating campus
to ensure that state and federal financial aid is
available to eligible students.
f) Requires the programs to ensure
that financial aid students receive same priority
for enrollment as all other students.
g) Requires that credit courses
offered be developed in accordance with relevant
provisions of the Education Code and Title 5 of
the California Code of Regulations governing
community college credit courses.
h) Applies the following statutes relative to
faculty and expenditures:
i) Requires a goal of
75:25 ratio of full-time to part-time
faculty in extension program credit classes.
ii) Requires the inclusion of pilot
program revenues and expenditures (which
conform to the "current expense" of
education) in the calculation/determination
of the district's compliance with the 50%
law governing program revenues and
expenditures (50% of current expense of
education must be for payment of salaries of
classroom instructors).
iii) Subjects the extension program to
collective bargaining agreements.
i) Prohibits supplanting of courses
funded with state apportionments and further
prohibits a community college district from
reducing courses funded with state apportionments
which are necessary for students to achieve basic
skills, workforce training, or transfer goals, or
to expand those courses as part of the pilot
program.
j) Authorizes a local governing board
SB 1550
Page 6
to establish fees that do not exceed the actual
cost of maintaining the pilot program and defines
actual costs, for this purpose, to include all of
the following:
i) Cost of instruction.
ii) Cost of necessary equipment and
supplies, student services and institutional
support costs.
iii) Administrative costs incurred by
the Chancellor's Office for providing
oversight of the pilot program.
Reporting Requirements
7) Requires each participating district to comply with
the following reporting requirements:
a) Collect student information, as
specified, and conduct an analysis of the program
effects on district workload and financial
status, and to submit this information to the
Chancellor's Office by August 1 annually.
b) Submit a schedule of established
course fees to the Chancellor by August 1
annually.
8) Requires the Chancellor to forward the data and
information submitted to the LAO.
9) Requires the LAO, on or before June 30, 2016, to
provide to the Legislature a report evaluating the
pilot program established drawing upon campus reports
and visits, interviews with faculty, students and
administrators, and any other source that LAO deems
relevant.
10) Requires the LAO report to include:
a) Summary statistics on course
offerings, enrollment, financing, and student
utilization of financial aid, funding, and
completion rates.
SB 1550
Page 7
b) A determination of the extent of
the pilot program's compliance with statutory
requirements and the extent to which it expanded
access for students.
c) An assessment of the program's
effect on the availability of, and enrollment in
state-supported courses, with particular
attention to the demographic make-up and
financial aid status of students enrolled in the
state-supported courses.
d) Recommendations regarding the
extension, expansion or modification of the
program and consideration of alternative
approaches that could achieve expanded access
without increased state funding.
11) Sunsets the bill's provisions on January 1, 2019.
STAFF COMMENTS
1) Need for the bill . Recent budget reductions have had
a real and detrimental impact on the ability of the
CCC to maintain its "open access" mission under the
state's Master Plan. CCC enrollment has been
constrained by two major factors: (1) reductions in
course-section offerings as a result of state budget
cuts, and (2) strong demand for CCC services,
including by adults seeking retraining and other
skills. The CCC system reports that many students,
particularly first-time students, have been unable to
enroll in the classes they need to progress toward
their educational goals. This access problem may
become became even more serious given the magnitude of
enacted and potential budget reductions.
In the 2011-12 budget, the CCC was cut by $400
million. In January 2012, mid-year "trigger" cuts
resulted in an additional $102 million reduction. The
CCC estimate that property tax and fee revenue
shortfalls may result in $149 million less than
projected. If the Governor's tax initiative is
rejected by voters, the CCC budget will face yet
another mid-year reduction of $292 million and $218
SB 1550
Page 8
million in apportionment funding would be deferred.
This bill, in an effort to expand access to career
technical and workforce development courses, would
establish a pilot program to authorize fees sufficient
to cover the actual costs of these classes at up to
eight community college campuses. It would also
establish conditions (consistent with budget actions
through which the Legislature has declared its intent
that community colleges implement workload reductions
in courses and programs outside of those needed by
students to achieve their basic skills, workforce
training, or transfer goals) which must be met
regarding the use of state general fund dollars
provided to the community colleges in order to
participate in the pilot program.
2) Summary of contents . In summary, this bill:
a) Creates a voluntary, six-year, competitive
pilot program limited to a maximum of 8 campuses
from 8 different districts.
b) Requires campuses to meet specified
requirements regarding cap, course offering and
enrollment priority conditions.
c) Establishes a variety of requirements to be
met by the extension programs established under
the authority granted by the bill.
d) Authorizes the Chancellor's Office to
monitor compliance with requirements, to rescind
participation in the program for non-compliance,
and to assess a fee to recover administrative
costs for providing oversight.
e) Requires independent evaluation and
reporting of the program's implementation and
effects by the Legislative Analyst's Office.
f) Sunsets the pilot program in 2019.
1) Correct a drafting error . This bill establishes
conditions to be met by districts in order to be
eligible to be selected for participation in the
SB 1550
Page 9
extension program and then conditions to be met within
the extension program. Priority enrollment policies
which must be implemented by a district in order to be
eligible for selection are currently contained within
provisions outlining requirements for participation in
the extension program. Staff recommends the bill be
amended to delete lines 5-20 on page 6 and insert this
language between lines 33 and 34 on page 4.
2) Under what conditions ? Arguably, the intent of this
bill is to give districts that have clear and ongoing
demand for their credit courses and programs that
cannot be met with limited state support an
alternative source of funding to meet that demand.
While the bill establishes some conditions to be met
by districts to demonstrate that they are maximizing
the use of state funding to meet the state's
objectives, does it go far enough?
a) Has the district restricted the enrollment
of students in classes for purposes of personal
enrichment under the state funded program? Is it
reasonable to authorize the shifting of any
student to a higher cost program if the
state-funded program continues to enroll students
in "activity" courses?
Staff recommends the bill be amended to require,
as a condition of selection that the applicant
district have adopted policies that "Limit the
state-supported enrollment of students in
activity courses as defined in Title 5 of the
California Code of regulations. The applicant
shall not claim state apportionment for students
who repeat either the same credit or non-credit
physical education or visual/performing arts
course that is part of the same sequence of
courses. This provision does not apply to
disabled students taking adaptive activity
courses, students participating in
intercollegiate athletics, or students with an
approved educational plan major in physical
education or the performing arts."
b) Does the district prioritize the enrollment
of students who are eligible for "in-state"
SB 1550
Page 10
tuition (California residents, military
dependents, AB 540 students) to ensure that
California's taxpayers, rather than foreign
students, or non-residents are being served in
the state-supported program?
Staff recommends the bill be amended to require
as a condition of selection that the applicant
district have adopted policies that prioritize
enrollment of students who are eligible for
in-state tuition.
c) The bill currently requires that an
applicant district promote enrollment priority
policies that do not unfairly or
disproportionately shift students eligible for
state financial aid programs from the
state-funded program to courses under the pilot
program. Shouldn't the district more
affirmatively ensure that students supported by
state financial aid programs (which are also
strained under the current budget) be served
primarily via the lower cost state-funded program
where possible?
Staff recommends this language be strengthened to
require that an applicant district promote
enrollment priority and student support policies
that ensure that students eligible for state
financial are not disproportionately shifted from
the state-funded program to the pilot program.
3) Smaller pilot, easier administration/oversight . This
bill currently authorizes up to 8 campuses be selected
for participation in the pilot program. While the bill
authorizes the collection of fees sufficient to cover
the cost of oversight by the Chancellor, it is
unlikely that the Chancellor's Office has sufficient
staff/fiscal resources to conduct the level of
administrative work involved in establishing,
implementing and overseeing a program for eight
campuses. Staff recommends the bill be amended to
reduce the maximum number of campuses that may
participate from 8 to 5.
4) Supplanting . This bill proposes creation of an
SB 1550
Page 11
extension program to offer career and workforce
development courses. Could districts shift high cost
workforce development programs to extension programs
while still maintaining and expanding lower cost basic
skills or transfer courses in the state funded program
without technically "supplanting" existing courses?
Could the bill result in a "maintenance-of-effort" in
the state funded program while encouraging new or
expanded programs for students who pay more in the
extension program?
Staff recommends the bill be amended to require, as a
condition for participation in the program, that
"Extension credit courses shall not supplant courses
funded with state apportionments. Districts shall not
reduce state-funded courses sections needed by
students to achieve workforce training goals in order
to expand those course sections as part of the
extension program." In addition, staff recommends the
bill be amended to define "career and workforce
development courses" to ensure that courses required
to meet transfer or basic skills goals are not shifted
to the extension program.
5) Paradigm shift? This bill proposes a small scale
pilot program whose elements may signal the initial
steps toward a significant departure from the open
access mission established for the community colleges
by the Master Plan and by state statute. Although the
UC and the CSU offer self-support extension programs,
these segments serve a defined population whereas the
community colleges have traditionally served as
California's way of ensuring that affordable access to
education is provided for all others who can benefit.
Is this the first step toward privatizing educational
opportunity at California's community colleges and to
linking access to the ability to pay? If so, should
the Legislature clarify the means by which this
unprecedented shift should occur?
Historically, districts have interpreted Education
Code section 78021 to authorize the offering of
courses at fees sufficient to cover the cost of
courses for contract education purposes only. In March
2012 the Santa Monica College Board of Trustees passed
an initiative to have a nonprofit foundation offer
SB 1550
Page 12
high-demand core classes such as math and English at a
higher price during the summer and winter sessions
alongside the same state-funded courses. Following
student protests and a request from the Chancellor of
the California Community Colleges, Santa Monica
College postponed its proposed two-tier fee plan to
obtain further input from students, faculty and staff
on ways to increase access to classes, which have been
reduced significantly due to insufficient funds.
This bill presents an opportunity to clarify the
conditions under which the Legislature would recognize
that a district has maximized its ability to meet the
Legislature's priorities with state funding and to
authorize pursuit of additional fee revenue to meet
enrollment demand.
Staff recommends the bill be amended to state,
"Education Code section 78021 shall not be construed
to authorize the implementation of a multi-tiered fee
system in the California Community Colleges through
the creation of a foundation or other affiliated
entity. The California Community Colleges shall not
charge a per unit fee for courses it, or an affiliated
entity or foundation, offers in excess of that
authorized by the Legislature pursuant to Education
Code 76300, except as expressly authorized to do so in
Education Code section 78130."
6) Prior legislation - AB 515 (Brownley, 2011), heard by
this committee on June 29, 2011, would also have
established a California Community Colleges Extension
Pilot Program. That bill, however, authorized
extensive participation by community colleges
throughout the state since any community college that
certified that it met the requirements of the program
would be eligible to participate. Although the bill
was heard by this committee, no vote was taken, and a
subsequent hearing on the bill was cancelled at the
request of the author.
SUPPORT
Cerritos College
OPPOSITION
SB 1550
Page 13
Antelope Valley Community College District
California Teachers Association
Kern Community College District
Los Angeles College Faculty
Los Angeles Community College District
Los Rios Community College District
Peralta Community College District
San Diego Community College District
Yosemite Community College District
Faculty Association of California Community Colleges