BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1348
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 1, 2013
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mike Gatto, Chair
AB 1348 (John A. Perez) - As Introduced: February 22, 2013
Policy Committee: Higher
EducationVote:13-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill establishes a new state oversight and coordinating
body for higher education. Specifically, this bill:
1)Establishes the California Higher Education Authority, to be
governed by a 13-member board of directors, appointed as
specified. Board members would be paid $100 per day of
official business plus travel expenses.
2)Establishes the authority's responsibilities, including:
a) Developing and monitoring the state's postsecondary
education goals and reporting on the postsecondary
education segments' progress toward their long-term goals.
b) Measuring and reporting on the segments' efficiency and
effectiveness in serving the state's needs.
c) Providing oversight and advice on postsecondary capital
outlay decisions.
d) Developing and recommending finance policies to the
governor and Legislature regarding such issues as
allocation of appropriations among the segments, student
fee policy, and financial aid policy.
e) Reviewing and making recommendations to the governor and
Legislature regarding major capacity decisions, such as
state- or fee-funded mission changes or new centers or
campuses.
AB 1348
Page 2
f) Acting as a postsecondary education information
clearinghouse for the Legislature, governor, and other
agencies, and developing and maintaining a comprehensive
database, with specified capabilities.
3)Transfers to the authority, by July 1, 2014, the data
management responsibilities of the former California
Postsecondary Education Commission (CPEC).
4)Authorizes the authority to require the governing boards and
institutions of postsecondary education to submit specified
data and requires the authority to furnish related information
to the governor and the Legislature upon request.
FISCAL EFFECT
In its last full year of operation, CPEC's General Fund
operating budget was $1.9 million for the equivalent of 18
positions. The new authority established in this bill would
likely have a budget of similar magnitude. In addition, the
authority would incur one-time information technology costs in
the range of $200,000.
COMMENTS
1)Background . AB 770 (Vasconcellos) of 1973 created CPEC and
made it responsible for the planning and coordination of
postsecondary education. CPEC was charged with providing
analysis, advice, and recommendations to the Legislature and
the governor on statewide policy and funding priorities. As
part of his 2011-12 budget, Governor Brown proposed
eliminating CPEC. Both houses rejected this proposal, but the
governor exercised his line item veto to remove all General
Fund support for CPEC, describing the commission as
"ineffective." In his veto message, however, the governor
acknowledged the need for coordinating and guiding state
higher education policy and requested that stakeholders
explore alternative ways these functions could be fulfilled.
On November 18, 2011, CPEC closed its office and ceased
operations. Its federal Teacher Quality Improvement grant
program was transferred to the California Department of
Education (CDE) and its extensive data resources were
transferred to the California Community Colleges (CCC)
Chancellor's Office.
AB 1348
Page 3
Over the last decade, a substantial number of policy analysts,
legislators, and researchers expressed dissatisfaction with
the effectiveness of CPEC and its capacity-in part due to
budget reductions-to exercise its statutory responsibilities.
Another contributing factor to CPEC's perceived lack of
effectiveness was its governance. CPEC was seen to be
dominated by the segment representatives who advocated a
consensus approach to decision making. In a 2003 review, the
Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) contended that the role
CPEC was expected to play "requires a critical perspective on
higher education issues and sometimes arriving at conclusions
with which the segments may strongly disagree."
2)Purpose . In a January report, "Improving Higher Education
Oversight," the LAO contends the state needs higher education
oversight that enables policymakers and others to monitor how
efficiently and effectively the postsecondary system is
serving the state's needs, and make changes to improve its
performance. The Analyst recommends that the new entity have
independence from the public higher education segments, have a
more unified governing board appointment process and be
assigned limited and clear responsibilities. AB 1348 is based
on the LAO recommendations.
According to the author, ""Coordination, oversight and
accountability in higher education are key to ensuring that
taxpayer dollars are being utilized in the most efficient and
effective manner possible and that students are progressing
toward their educational goals without encountering
unnecessary barriers?" The author intends that, unlike CPEC,
the California Higher Education Authority would be charged
with the responsibility and assigned the authority and fiscal
capacity to carry out its mission.
3)Prior Legislation . Last year, AB 2190 (John A. Perez), an
identical bill, was held on this committee's Suspense file.
SB 721 (Lowenthal), which was vetoed in 2012, was the latest
in a long line of unsuccessful legislative attempts to
establish an accountability framework for higher education.
SB 1138 (Liu), which required the CDE and the State Board of
Education to assume CPEC's data management responsibilities,
was held on Suspense last year in Senate Appropriations.
AB 1348
Page 4
Analysis Prepared by : Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081