BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Carol Liu, Chair
2013-2014 Regular Session
BILL NO: AB 1358
AUTHOR: Fong
AMENDED: June 27, 2013
FISCAL COMM: Yes HEARING DATE: July 3, 2013
URGENCY: No CONSULTANT:Daniel Alvarez
SUBJECT : Student body association: student representation
fee.
SUMMARY
This bill increases the current community college student
representation fee from one dollar ($1) to two dollars ($2)
per semester, subject to an affirmative majority vote
(rather than two-thirds) of a community colleges' students
and directs the additional one dollar ($1) fee increase to
be expended on the establishment and support the operations
of a statewide community college student organization, as
specified.
BACKGROUND
Current law permits the governing board of a community
college district to authorize the students of a college to
organize a student body association. (Education Code §
76060)
Current law provides that a student body association may
order an election be held for the purpose of establishing a
student representation fee of one dollar ($1) per semester.
An affirmative vote of two-thirds (2/3) of the students
voting in the election shall be sufficient to establish the
fee. However, the number of students who vote must equal
or exceed the average number of students who voted in the
previous three student body elections. The fee money
collected shall be expended to provide support of
governmental affairs representatives who may be stating
their positions and viewpoints before city, county, and
district governments and before offices and agencies of
state government. Students may refuse to pay the fee for
religious, political, financial, or moral reasons. The
AB 1358
Page 2
chief fiscal officer of the community college shall have
custody of the fee money collected, but the funds shall be
disbursed to the student body association for the specified
purposes. Finally, the community college district may
retain a portion of the fees collected that is equal to the
actual cost of administering these fees up to, but not more
than, seven percent. (EC § 76060.5)
ANALYSIS
This bill increases the current community college student
representation fee from one dollar ($1) to two dollars ($2)
per semester, subject to an affirmative majority vote
(rather than two-thirds) of a community colleges' students
and directs the additional one dollar ($1) fee increase to
be expended on the establishment and support the operations
of a statewide community college student organization, as
specified. More specifically, this bill:
1) Clarifies that current and prospective student
representation fee (SRF) revenue may be expended on
local or statewide student body associations.
2) Authorizes a student body association (SBA) to call
campus-wide elections to determine whether to assess a
SRF of two dollars ($2) per semester.
3) Reduces the affirmative vote from two-thirds to a
majority of the students voting in the election, as
specified, to establish the SRF.
4) Specifies that $1 of every $2 fee collected shall be
expended to establish and support the operations of an
independent statewide community college student
organization that is recognized by the Board of
Governors of the California Community Colleges, with
governmental affairs representatives to advocate
before the Legislature and other state and local
governmental entities. The measure specifies this
provision only applies to SRFs adopted on or after
January 1, 2014.
5) States that any community college SBA that has adopted
a SRF before January 1, 2014 retains authority to
AB 1358
Page 3
continue to receive the one dollar ($1) fee as
authorized prior to enactment of this measure. The
SBA may conduct an election to adopt a revised SRF -
if the students pass the revised SRF, then one dollar
($1) of every two dollars ($2) collected shall be
expended for purposes specified under #3 above.
6) Requires the community college district (CCD) to
annually prepare a summary of all revenue collected
from the SRF and the expenditures of the proceeds. The
summary shall be presented at the community college
district board meeting each year and posted to the CCD
Internet web site.
STAFF COMMENTS
1) Need for the bill . According to the author, the 2.4
million students at the California Community College
(CCC), unlike their counterparts at the University of
California and the California State University, do not
have a sustainably funded statewide student
association. AB 1358 will assist CCC students in
establishing and sustaining statewide legislative and
governmental advocacy through their recognized
representative organization, the Student Senate of
California Community Colleges (SSCCC).
2) Is this the right time to raise fees of any kind ?
Although the price per unit at California Community
Colleges remains the lowest in the nation, students
face increased costs for books and other school
related materials. Although the student
representation fee is voluntary and students can opt
out for various reasons, including if they cannot
afford the cost; it is presently unknown how many
students are aware that they can opt-out of paying the
SRF. According to the SSCCC, there is a great deal of
support for an increased SRF for the sole purpose of
being able to form an organized independent statewide
organization.
3) Fund balance of current fee viewed from a statewide
perspective. At present, according to unaudited
survey information provided by the California
AB 1358
Page 4
Community College Chancellor's Office, for the
three-year period ending with 2011-12, there was a
total statewide fund balance of approximately $3.8
million - actual fund balance amounts vary among the
community college districts that have a student
representation fee (SRF) currently in place - and
likely understates the actual amount available on a
statewide basis.
In an attempt to provide more transparency and review,
this bill now requires the community college district
(CCD) to annually prepare a summary of all revenue
collected from the SRF and the expenditures of the
proceeds. The summary shall be presented at the
community college district board meeting each year and
posted to the CCD Internet Web site.
4) Why don't local colleges use a portion of their
current SRF fund balance to provide for a statewide
advocacy approach for community college students ?
Current law permits the existing fee revenue to be
used to "provide support of governmental affairs
representatives who may be stating their positions and
viewpoints before city, county, and district
governments and before offices and agencies of state
government." According to current Student Senate of
the California Community Colleges (SSCCC)
representatives, many local student body associations
(SBA) have been advised by their colleges that
expenditures of SRF can only be used for expenses
incurred by the specific colleges' student
representatives for advocacy approaches consistent
with statute, and not for statewide advocacy. In
addition, some colleges do provide some level of
financial assistance; however, this type of support
varies from year-to-year and does not create a stable
funding environment to support on-going statewide
advocacy efforts.
The author has attempted to partially address this
issue by clarifying a SBA may expend current or
prospective SRF funds for "?local and statewide
student body associations?" The proposed language is
an attempt to clearly permit existing SRF to be used
AB 1358
Page 5
for statewide purposes, if so directed by the local
SBAs; this in part may have the effect of lowering
existing fund balances.
5) Senate Education Committee of June 19. The committee
had a robust discussion on the SRF fund balances, the
necessity for an additional dollar fee, the concept of
community college students having a greater statewide
presence, but also the additional fiscal and
management accountability that comes with a statewide
organization. Since this time, the representative
students and author's office have had numerous
meetings, with various entities, on the outstanding
issues raised.
The concept of greater statewide advocacy and uniform
representation continues to make sense; however, the
bill is vague on the goals of what an independent
statewide community college student organization
should strive to accomplish. In addition,
transparency and accountability should be cornerstones
of a responsible statewide entity.
Therefore, consistent with subsequent discussions with
the author's office, staff recommends the following
amendments as refined with assistance from Legislative
Counsel:
a) On page 3, line 21 after the comma, insert:
With effective student representation and
participation in state-level community college
shared governance and
b) On page 3, line 23 after the period insert:
The underlying goals shall include, but are not
limited to: (a) establishing a sustainable
foundation for statewide community college
student representation and advocacy; (b)
promotion of institutional and organizational
memory; (c) insuring and maintaining responsible
community college student organizational
oversight and decision-making; (d) strengthening
regional approaches for college representation
and coordination; (e) promote and enhance student
AB 1358
Page 6
opportunities for engagement in community college
student issues and affairs; and (f) provide for
open and public transparency and accountability.
c) On page 3, between lines 24 and 25, insert
new subdivisions (d) and (e):
(d) Fees collected pursuant to subdivision (c)
shall be distributed to the Board of Governors
annually prior to February 1. The Board of
Governors shall have custody of the money and
distribute annually to the recognized statewide
community college student organization by April
15 annually, provided that the student
organization shall satisfy specified conditions
as follows: (1) establish itself as a legal
entity type that is registered with the
California Secretary of State; (2) demonstrate
compliance with all applicable state and federal
laws and reporting requirements; (3) exercise
prudent fiscal management by establishing
generally accepted accounting controls and
procedures; (4) complete on an annual basis an
independent financial audit, the results of which
shall be provided to the Board for review each
year and serve as a condition for further funding
provided that the results of the annual audit
identify no significant audit findings; however
in no event shall funds be withheld without the
student organization having the ability to
address and correct any identified concerns,
errors or deficiencies contained in the annual
audit; and (5) meet its obligations and address
the goals identified in subdivision (c) .
(e) Meetings of the statewide community college
student organization shall be open to the public
and adhere to Government Code section 54950 et.
seq. and Government Code section 6250 et. seq."
d) On page 4, between lines 28 and 29, insert
new subdivisions (h) and (i):
(h) Any costs, incurred by the Chancellor's
office to implement subdivisions (c) and (d)
AB 1358
Page 7
shall be reimbursed by the statewide community
college student organization.
(i) In the event no organization that qualifies
for funding in accordance with this section is
recognized by the Board of Governors, funds
collected pursuant to this section shall be held
by the Chancellor's office until such time as a
qualifying organization is recognized, or
returned to the source of funds.
e) Two technical changes as follows:
On page 3, lines 18 and 19, strike
"an independent" and insert: a
On page 3, line 13, strike
"associations" and insert: organizations
1) Student Representative Fee . According to the 2012
California Community Colleges Chancellor's Office
(CCCCO) Student Fee Handbook, a newly formed student
government organization cannot order an election for
the purpose of having the student body vote to
establish a student representation fee (SRF) without
having held three prior student body elections. In
specifically requiring three previous student body
elections prior to raising the student fee issue, the
intent of the Legislature was to ensure meaningful
participation in the student body election process.
However, under certain circumstances, voting results
from student body elections held under a previous and
related student government structure may satisfy this
requirement.
The CCCCO finds that if a CCC district has multiple
colleges and a student attends more than one college
within the district, that he/she may be responsible
for a SRF at each college he/she attends.
SUPPORT
Associated Students of El Camino College
Associated Students of Pasadena City College
Associated Students of Los Angeles Trade Technical College
Associated Students of Modesto Junior College
AB 1358
Page 8
California Community College Association of Student
Trustees
California Federation of Teachers
California State Student Association
California Teachers Association
Coast Community College District Student Council
Faculty Association of California Community Colleges
San Jose City College Student Senate
Santa Rosa Junior College Associated Students
Student Senate for California Community Colleges
Student Trustee of Napa Valley College
University of California Student Association
OPPOSITION
Community College League of California