BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 470
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 15, 2013
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mike Gatto, Chair
AB 470 (Mullin) - As Amended: May 6, 2013
Policy Committee: Education
Vote:6-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill removes $321,000 (GF/98) apportioned under categorical
flexibility to support the School Safety Consolidated Grant
(SSCG) program for the purpose of requiring the Department of
Justice (DOJ) and the State Department of Education (SDE) to
continue contracting with one or more professional trainers to
coordinate statewide workshops for school districts, county
offices of education (COEs), and schoolsite personnel in
implementing school safety requirements, as specified.
FISCAL EFFECT
Annual GF/98 reallocation of $321,000 to SDE to continue
contracting for the coordination of statewide workshops, as
specified.
COMMENTS
1)Background . As part of the February 2009 budget package, SB 4
X3 (Ducheny), Third Extraordinary Session, Chapter 12,
Statutes of 2009, provided local education agencies (LEAs)
with unprecedented fiscal and policy flexibility related to
over 40 categorical programs, including the SSCG program,
between FY 2008-09 and FY 2012-13. Specifically, any LEA that
received funding for specified categorical programs in FY
2008-09 is authorized to use this funding for any other
educational purpose until FY 2012-13. The LEA may choose to
continue operating the categorical program it received funding
for, or redirect it for any other educational purpose it deems
appropriate. SB 70 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review),
Chapter 7, Statutes of 2011, extended this flexibility until
AB 470
Page 2
FY 2014-15.
This bill removes $321,000 of SSCG program funds from
categorical flexibility and requires this funding to continue
to be used to contract with an entity to provide school safety
training.
2)Purpose . The 2012 Budget Act allocated $14.3 million GF/98
for the SSCG program, which consists of the following program
funds: (a) Safe Planning and Partnership minigrants; (b)
School Community Policing program; (c) Gang-risk intervention
program; (d) Safety plans for new schools; (e) School
Community Violence Prevention program; and (f) Conflict
Resolution.
These funds are distributed under a competitive grant process
administered by the Superintendent of Public Instruction, in
conjunction with DOJ, to school districts (including county
offices of education) in order to carry out one or more of the
purposes specified in the above programs. As part of
developing and updating school safety plans, DOJ and SDE are
required to contract with an entity to coordinate statewide
workshops for districts and COEs to assist them in the
development of their school safety and crisis response plans.
Furthermore, the annual budget act includes language
authorizing up to $400,000 of the $14.3 million GF/98
allocated to be used for this purpose. According to SDE, it
contracts with the Kern County Office of Education (KCOE) in
an amount of $321,000 to meet these requirements.
The author states, "According to a 2013 poll by the California
Endowment, 96% of California voters supported 'training school
staff in emergency response' as an approach to address school
violence. Nationally, President Obama released his plan to
improve school safety, and he highlighted the need to gather
and share best practices. After the Sandy Hook shooting in
December [2012], demand for these trainings has increased
dramatically across the state. The trainings are in demand
because of their proven success in the public school system.
In Alameda, for example, school officials successfully
apprehended a student who brought a gun to school. School
officials had recently been through the training program,
where they learned to put protocols in place that ultimately
assisted them in appropriately responding to the incident."
AB 470
Page 3
3)Need for the bill ? Under categorical flexibility, school
districts and COEs receiving any of this funding may use it
for any educational purpose. Currently, a portion of SSCG
funds are used by SDE to contract with KCOE for school safety
training. This activity has continued since categorical
flexibility was enacted in 2009. Likewise, regardless of any
legislative change - as proposed under the Governor's Local
Control Funding Formula - SDE would still be bound by any
requirements for the length of its contract with a COE. The
committee may wish to consider whether this bill is necessary.
4)Existing law specifies that each school district and county
office of education (COE) is responsible for the overall
development of all K-12 school's comprehensive school safety
plans. It also delineates the contents of these plans,
including procedures for dealing with safety-related issues
and emergency procedures. The school safety plan is required
to be updated annually.
5)This bill conflicts with the Governor's proposed Local Control
Funding Formula (LCFF) . The LCFF proposes to consolidate the
majority of the state's categorical programs, including those
under categorical flexibility, within the existing revenue
limit (general purpose funding) structure to establish a new
K-12 student formula phased in over seven years. The
governor's proposed budget provides $1.6 billion GF/98 in FY
2013-14 to begin increasing district rates to a target base
rate and provides supplemental funding for English learner
pupils, low income pupils, and foster youth.
6)Related legislation .
a) AB 88 (Buchanan), pending in the Assembly Education
Committee, implements the LCFF, which establishes a new
K-12 funding formula and eliminates all of the flexed
categorical programs.
b) AB 1186 (Bonilla), pending in this committee, extends
categorical program flexibility from FY 2014-15 to FY
2019-20 and requires school districts to spend increased
funding on professional development for the Common Core
AB 470
Page 4
(CC) Standards, purchasing technology to implement CC
Standards assessments, or implementation of science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics programs, as
specified.
c) SB 223 (Liu), pending in the Senate Appropriations
Committee, extends categorical program flexibility provided
that each LEA meets specified accountability requirements.
Analysis Prepared by : Kimberly Rodriguez / APPR. / (916)
319-2081