BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1186
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 15, 2013
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mike Gatto, Chair
AB 1186 (Bonilla) - As Amended: May 6, 2013
Policy Committee: Education
Vote:7-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill extends the provisions of categorical funding
flexibility by five years (2014 to 2019) and allows only local
education agencies (LEAs) to continue using these funds for any
educational purpose, if they use at least 9% of the total amount
of funds they receive for specified purposes. Specifically,
this bill:
1)Requires LEAs to use at least 9% of total flexed categorical
program funds for a combination, of the following purposes:
a) Professional development for certificated and
administrative employees to implement the Common Core (CC)
Standards.
b) Purchasing technology for the purpose of implementing
state assessments aligned with the CC Standards.
c) Implementation of programs that integrate science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics, as appropriate
for grades 7-12.
2)Deems these provisions inoperative if either the following
apply:
a) The total amount provided for flexed categorical
programs in the 2013-14 fiscal year (FY) is increased by
less than 18% over the amount provided for this programs in
the 2012-13 FY.
b) A local control funding formula for grades K-12 is
enacted during the 2013-14 Legislative Session.
3)Requires the State Department of Education (SDE), if it
AB 1186
Page 2
determines these provisions apply, to promptly display this
fact on its Internet website.
FISCAL EFFECT
GF/98 cost pressure of at least $823.2 million to increase the
amount of funding provided to flexed categorical programs by
18%. If this were to occur, the bill requires 9% of these total
funds ($484.7 million GF/98) to be spent on specified purposes.
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, 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 FY 2014-15.
This bill extends the flexibility for five years until 2019-20
FY and only allows school districts to continue using these
for any educational purpose if they devote 9% of these funds
to specified purposes.
2)Purpose . As a condition of applying for the federal Race to
the Top (RTT) grant program, states were required to adopt the
CC Standards in ELA and mathematics by the fall of 2010. In
August 2010, the SBE adopted these standards.
The U.S. Department of Education, using RTT grant funding,
issued a competitive grant for the development of a
comprehensive assessment system based on the CC Standards in
ELA and mathematics that would adhere to the testing
requirements of the federal Elementary and Secondary Education
Act (ESEA). ESEA requires testing in ELA and mathematics in
grades three through eight and once in grades ten through 12.
AB 1186
Page 3
Two assessment consortia were funded through this process: the
Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and
Careers and the SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium
(SMARTER Balanced). Each consortium was awarded grant funding
to develop an assessment system aligned to the CC Standards in
ELA and mathematics and to help participating states
transition implementing the standards and the common
assessments. Both consortia are scheduled to operationalize
assessments 2014-15 and include use computer administered
assessments.
The author contends the state is in this midst of undergoing a
major instructional transformation with the implementation of
new standards and assessments. LEAs will need to revamp their
current professional development training, purchase
instructional materials aligned to the new standards, and
purchase technology to administer the SMARTER Balanced
assessments.
3)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.
This bill would not become operative if the LCFF or a similar
formula were enacted in the 2013-14 Legislative Session.
4)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) SB 69 (Liu), pending in the Senate Appropriations
Committee, establishes a LCFF by modifying the governor's
proposal.
AB 1186
Page 4
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