BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 1199
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 1199 (Fong)
As Amended May 24, 2013
2/3 vote. Urgency
HIGHER EDUCATION 10-1 APPROPRIATIONS 12-5
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Williams, Ch�vez, Bloom, |Ayes:|Gatto, Bocanegra, |
| |Fong, Fox, Jones-Sawyer, | |Bradford, |
| |Levine, Medina, | |Ian Calderon, Campos, |
| |Quirk-Silva, Weber | |Eggman, Gomez, Hall, |
| | | |Ammiano, Pan, Quirk, |
| | | |Weber |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Wilk |Nays:|Harkey, Bigelow, |
| | | |Donnelly, Linder, Wagner |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Requires the Board of Governors (BOG) of the
California Community Colleges (CCC) to adopt a stabilization
formula for CCC districts under accreditation sanction with
decreased student enrollments. Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires the CCC BOG to adopt a stabilization formula for
calculating a qualifying CCC district's revenue level for a
qualifying fiscal year that provides for revenue adjustments
if all of the following conditions are met:
a) The district or campus of the district is subject to a
probation or a "show cause" accreditation sanction;
b) The district has identified a new funding source
sufficient for the full payment of any fund liability in
equal installments over the next two years; and,
c) The district submits an improvement plan to the CCC
Chancellor that includes a six-month accreditation
compliance report signed by the chancellor of the CCC
district and passed by the CCC district board of trustees
that details the progress the district has made before the
date of the report and a timetable for the completion of a
full and satisfactory accreditation response.
AB 1199
Page 2
2)Requires the stabilization formula adopted pursuant to 1)
above to provide the following adjustments in district
revenues for a qualifying district experiencing decreases in
full-time equivalent students (FTES):
a) Decreases in FTES shall result in revenue reductions
beginning in the year following the initial year in which
the district qualifies for this stabilization funding at
the district's marginal funding per FTES and,
b) Revenue reductions in the second and third years after
the district qualifies for this stabilization funding shall
include payments by the district of equal installments in
each of these years that covers the difference between the
stabilization funding the district would have received
pursuant to existing law and what the district did receive
pursuant to 2)a) above.
3)Declares this an urgency statute allowing the bill to take
effect immediately upon enactment.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, of the two districts currently under show cause
sanction, only the City College of San Francisco (CCSF) has a
new funding source that could be applicable to this bill. Last
November, San Francisco approved a parcel tax to raise $16
million per year for CCSF. The district's governing board is
planning to use most of this revenue to increase its operating
reserve and address other deficiencies noted by the accrediting
body.
The CCC Chancellor's Office estimates that, based on current
enrollment estimates, the stabilization formula would result in
an additional allocation within Proposition 98 funds of $5.4
million to CCSF for 2012-13, which would be repaid by the
district over the following two fiscal years.
COMMENTS : Existing law provides a year of "stabilization"
funding, during which the district receives the same funding as
the previous year. This is because a district usually does not
know that its FTES has declined until it begins its enrollment
counts, which occur at the same time the state is dispersing
funds and after the district has hired faculty and determined
AB 1199
Page 3
its class schedules. If enrollment declines beyond one year,
the district's revenues are reduced by the decrease in FTES.
However, those reductions are restored if enrollments increase
during the subsequent three years, providing a district's with a
buffer against fluctuating enrollments.
This bill would require the BOG to adopt a formula for
qualifying districts that would provide an additional year of
stabilization funding for districts under severe accreditation
sanction and require those districts to use new funding sources
to repay the funding over the subsequent two years. Eligible
districts must meet the following criteria:
1)Be on probation or "show cause" accreditation status.
2)Identified a new funding source sufficient for the full
payment of any fund liability in equal installments over the
next two years.
3)Issued an accreditation compliance report, detailing the
progress the district has made prior to the date of the report
and includes a timetable for the completion of a full and
satisfactory accreditation response, certified by the CCC
Chancellor.
Accreditation is a voluntary system of self-regulation developed
to evaluate overall educational quality and institutional
effectiveness. CCCs are accredited by the Accrediting
Commission of Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC), which is
part of the Western Association of Colleges and Universities.
Accreditation is required to receive state appropriations and to
be eligible for federal and state financial aid programs. There
are three levels of sanction: Warning, Probation, and Show
Cause. Follow up reports and accreditation visits are required
to retain full accreditation.
Over the years, many colleges have faced accreditation
sanctions, including Show Cause. With the exception of
one-Compton College in 2004-all have retained accreditation. In
fact, College of the Redwoods and Cuesta College sufficiently
addressed their identified deficiencies and were removed from
Show Cause in January. Of the 112 CCCs, six are on Probation
status and two are on Show Cause status-CCSF and College of the
Sequoias.
AB 1199
Page 4
Last July, ACCJC identified numerous deficiencies at CCSF and
moved the district directly to the most severe level of
sanction-"Show Cause." ACCJC identified numerous deficiencies
covering a range of district operations. The most substantive
findings focus on failures in the areas of fiscal planning,
fiscal integrity, governance and administration, as well as
failure to completely address eight recommendations from a 2006
ACCJC evaluation team. The CCSF Board of Trustees has taken
numerous actions and approved plans to address the identified
deficiencies; however, it has been a contentious process with
much opposition from local stakeholders. Even with an urgency
clause, this measure is unlikely to go into effect before June
15, 2013, when ACCJC decides CCSF's accreditation status.
Analysis Prepared by : Jeanice Warden / HIGHER ED. / (916)
319-3960
FN: 0000912