BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 955
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB 955 (Williams)
As Amended September 5, 2013
Majority vote
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |50-16|(May 20, 2013) |SENATE: |26-12|(September 9, |
| | | | | |2013) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: HIGHER ED.
SUMMARY : Requires the California Community Colleges
Chancellor's Office (CCCCO) to establish a voluntary pilot
program that authorizes a community college district (CCD) to
establish and maintain an extension program during summer and
winter intersessions, provided the CCD has been at enrollment
capacity for the prior two years; requires participating CCDs
use one-third of fee revenue they collect and supplemental funds
from campus foundations or any other nonstate funds to provide
financial assistance to students eligible for the Board of
Governors (BOG) fee waiver; requires the Legislative Analyst's
Office (LAO), by January 1, 2017, to submit a report on the
pilot program to the Legislature, as specified; states the
intent of the Legislature that at least one campus should begin
implementation of the pilot program by January 2014, and that an
additional five campuses should implement the pilot program by
July 1, 2014; and, sunsets the measure on January 1, 2018.
The Senate amendments :
1)Create a pilot of six eligible community college campuses.
2)Define eligible community college campus to mean one of the
following campuses:
a) College of the Canyons (in Santa Clarita);
b) Crafton Hills College (in Yucaipa);
c) Long Beach City College;
d) Oxnard College;
e) Pasadena City College; and,
AB 955
Page 2
f) Solano Community College (in Fairfield).
3)Define eligible CCD to mean a CCD with an eligible community
college campus.
4)Require an extension program have all of following
characteristics:
a) The program shall be self-supporting and all costs
associated with the program shall be recovered;
b) Enrollment in the pilot program shall not be reported
for state apportionment funding, but program enrollment
shall be open to the public;
c) The program shall be developed in conformance with
existing law and regulation related to California Community
College (CCC) credit courses;
d) The program shall be subject to CCD collective
bargaining agreements; and,
e) The program shall apply to all courses leading to
certificates, degrees, or transfer preparation.
5)Require the CCCCO establish a voluntary pilot program through
which an eligible community college campus may establish and
maintain extension programs offering credit courses during
summer and winter intersessions and, to the extent feasible,
determine whether an eligible CCD meets the criteria as
specified, prior to its participation in the pilot program.
6)Specify that the governing board of an eligible CCD may
request to participate in the pilot program.
7)Specify that eligible CCDs must prioritize enrollment in the
extension program courses with first priority given to current
CCC students who are eligible for resident tuition and second
priority given to students who are eligible for resident
tuition.
8)Require, in addition to the one-third of the fee revenue
collected, an eligible CCD to supplement financial assistance
with funds from campus foundations or any other nonstate funds
AB 955
Page 3
for students who would normally qualify for the BOG fee waiver
and require reporting on the expenditure of the funds, as
specified.
9)Require an eligible community college campus participating in
the pilot to collect and keep specified records related to the
program and report them to the CCCCO by October 1 of each year
and require the CCC BOG to, by March 31, 2014, adopt reporting
requirements for the pilot program; make ineligible for
participation a CCD that fails to comply with the BOG's
requirements.
10)Require the CCCCO to accumulate information from the
participating CCDs reports and submit specified data to the
LAO by November 1 of each year.
11)Require the LAO report to include the following:
a) Summary statistics relating to course offerings, student
enrollment, including demographic data on the students
enrolled in courses, if available, financing student use of
financial aid, funding, and course completion rates for the
pilot program;
b) A determination of the extent to which the pilot program
complies with statutory requirements and the extent to
which the pilot results in expanded access for students;
and,
c) Recommendation as to whether the pilot program should be
extended, expanded, or modified.
12)Change the sunset from January 1, 2020, to January 1, 2018.
13)State legislative intent that eligible CCDs with campuses
participating in the voluntary pilot conduct a review of the
data by race, ethnicity, and gender of students enrolled in
the pilot program and compare the data to data of students
enrolled in the regular academic term to determine if
low-income or minority students are not being served and take
affirmative steps, such as recruitment, financial assistance,
and other measures, to increase participation of low-income
and minority students in the pilot program if the review shows
significant disparities.
14)State legislative intent that at least one participating
AB 955
Page 4
campus should begin implementation of the pilot program by
January 2014, and that an additional five campuses should
implement the pilot program by July 1, 2014.
15)Make clarifying and technical changes.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, the fiscal impact associated with this measure
entails the following: 1) Oversight: Likely minor ongoing
workload for the CCCCO; 2) CCD participation: Potentially
significant costs and revenue to CCDs that elect to participate,
to comply with reporting requirements. Significant (elective)
costs to offer extension courses, expected to be fully recovered
by increased fees; and, 3) LAO report: Minor and absorbable
costs to complete the required report.
COMMENTS : According to the author, numerous researchers have
raised concerns about California's ability to meet its workforce
needs to sustain its economy. Experts estimate that California
will need 3.5 million additional degrees in the next decade just
to keep pace. The California Community College (CCC) is the key
to meeting this need and providing opportunity for most
Californians to achieve their educational and professional
goals. Yet, recent budget shortfalls have resulted in the worst
cuts to the system in recent memory-reductions that are unlikely
to be completely restored in the near future. This bill would
allow colleges to offer courses leading to transfer or a degree
or certificate during intersessions. Since most campuses have
eliminated programs, extension offerings give students an
opportunity to take the courses they are not able to get during
the state-supported regular session to accelerate the completion
of their goals. Providing additional opportunities for students
to complete high-demand courses should free up space in the
companion state-supported courses offered during the regular
session, increasing all students' ability to complete their
education in a timely manner. Participation in these programs
is completely voluntary-it is up to the districts to offer
extension programs, and it is the student's decision to take
them.
Impact of budget cuts on CCC. Funding for CCC has been cut $809
million, or 12%, over the past three years. According to a
March 2013 report by the Public Policy Institute of California
(PPIC), course offerings have declined from 420,000 to 334,000
since 2008-86,000 or 21% of course offerings-and most were
AB 955
Page 5
credit courses necessary to transfer or obtain a degree or
certificate. PPIC estimates that since 2008, 600,000 students
have not been able to enroll in classes, and another 500,000
students were on waiting lists for Fall 2012 courses.
Reduced summer session offerings. Budget cuts resulted in
reductions in a higher proportion of summer course sections than
in either Fall or Spring terms, suggesting that many colleges
tackled budget cuts by prioritizing course offerings in the
primary Fall and Spring academic terms. PPIC notes that
reductions in summer offerings may slow the completion rates for
some students, as well as reduce the earnings for some faculty
and staff who previously relied on summer income.
Differential fee precedent and access. CCC is intended to
provide open access to all Californians, offering low fees and
generous aid. While this bill allows extension courses only
during intersessions when they will not compete with
state-supported programs, it does create a precedent at CCC of
providing courses for those willing to pay higher fees. These
fees will be based on nonresident tuition, which varies by
district but averages around $200 per unit (state-funded courses
are $46 per unit). Participating districts are required to use
one-third of fee revenue they collect to provide financial
assistance to students eligible for the BOG fee waiver.
Who could benefit? The author notes that the lack of courses
during intersessions impacts veterans, who must be enrolled in
courses to access benefits to which they are entitled through
the Post 9/11 GI Bill. The GI Bill covers a student's tuition,
as well as housing and other expenses. However, a student must
be enrolled in a course to access the housing benefit. Thus,
when veterans attend a college that does not offer courses in
the summer or winter, they do not receive the housing stipend,
upon which many veterans depend. The availability of extension
courses may also help students who wish to make progress toward
their goals during the intersession, particularly those students
who need only a course or two to complete but have been crowded
out of those courses. The author notes that the lack of
community college course offerings in workforce preparation
fields has led many students to enroll in for-profit
institutions, which are much more expensive than community
colleges and often require students to incur significant loan
debt.
AB 955
Page 6
If not this, then what? In its March report, Public Policy
Institute of California (PPIC) notes that while the state's
fiscal outlook has improved, the additional funding is unlikely
to make up for years of significant cuts. The report concludes
that if community colleges are to fulfill their multiple
missions, the state must consider alternatives, including the
following:
1)Pursue more local parcel taxes, although PPIC notes that only
two of the four measures on the November 2012 ballot were
approved by voters.
2)Increase student fees to bring more revenue into the system.
3)Reduce the income thresholds to qualify for a BOG fee waiver
to bring more fee revenue into the system.
4)Require students to apply for federal financial aid in order
to get a BOG fee waiver.
5)Consider alternative fee models, including charging more to
those who can afford to pay more accompanied by aid to hold
low-income students harmless.
Analysis Prepared by : Jeanice Warden / HIGHER ED. / (916)
319-3960
FN: 0002723