BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                      AB 38


                                                                    Page  1





          Date of Hearing:  April 22, 2015


                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS


                                 Jimmy Gomez, Chair


          AB  
          38 (Eggman) - As Amended March 23, 2015


           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Policy       |Higher Education               |Vote:|12 - 1       |
          |Committee:   |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 


          Urgency:  No  State Mandated Local Program:  NoReimbursable:  No


          SUMMARY:


          This bill requires the Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) to  
          conduct an initial analysis assessing the need for a new  
          California State University (CSU) campus and report its findings  
          to the Legislature and the Department of Finance by January 1,  








                                                                      AB 38


                                                                    Page  2





          2017. Specifically, this bill:





          1)Requires the analysis to include the following:



             a)   The need within certain regions for a CSU campus,  
               including all of the following to the extent applicable  
               data is available:

               i)     Enrollment demand, as specified, based on relative  
                 demographic levels and eligible students for each county.

               ii)    For each county, data on CSU applicants, admissions,  
                 and enrollment for the most recent year available to  
                 estimate college-going rates to CSU, and,



               iii)   Data on adult educational attainment by county for  
                 the most recent year available.

             b)   An analysis of the physical capacities of existing CSU  
               campuses, as outlined in their master plans, relative to  
               current enrollment.

          1)Requires CSU to provide whatever data the LAO requests to  
            complete its analysis.



          FISCAL EFFECT:


          The LAO indicates it can prepare the required analysis within  








                                                                      AB 38


                                                                    Page  3





          its existing resources. Given that this is an initial, somewhat  
          high-level analysis, CSU's costs to provide LAO with needed data  
          should be minor and absorbable. CSU's costs will be more  
          significant if regional market analyses, sphere of influence  
          studies, or assessments of the potential academic and fiscal  
          impacts on other CSU institutions were to be requested.


          COMMENTS:


          1)Purpose. The author contends this measure is a necessary first  
            step in establishing an objective process for evaluating  
            California's needs for a new public university campus -  
            through a statewide study that examines various factors in  
            determining what areas are the best locations for the  
            establishment of a new CSU campus.



          2)Background. Current law declares legislative intent that sites  
            for new institutions or branches of the CSU not be authorized  
            or acquired unless recommended by the California Postsecondary  
            Education Commission (CPEC) and that CPEC should advise the  
            Legislature and the Governor regarding the need for, and  
            location of, new institutions and campuses of public higher  
            education. After several years of declining budgets and then  
            elimination of all funding by the Governor in 2011-12,  
            however, CPEC ceased operations in the Fall 2011.



            CPEC's review process for a potential new campus of the CSU  
            (or for the University of California or the community  
            colleges) involved several stages. The last step in the review  
            process required the segment to submit to CPEC a study  
            providing a justification for the campus or center on the site  
            identified.  This needs study encompassed nine different areas  
            (enrollment, alternatives, academic planning, student  








                                                                      AB 38


                                                                    Page  4





            services, costs, accessibility, effects on other institutions,  
            environmental impact, and economic efficiency) according to  
            which the proposal was evaluated.





            The study called for in this bill appears to be preliminary in  
            nature, specifically looking at enrollment demand, educational  
            attainment, and planned physical capacity of existing CSU  
            campuses. It should be noted that the Department of Finance's  
            most recent demographic projections show only a 0.6% increase  
            in high school graduates over the next 10 years, and only a  
            10% growth in the college age population through 2060.





          3)Prior Legislation. AB 736 (Fox) of 2013, which required CSU to  
            study the feasibility of a CSU satellite program, and  
            ultimately, an independent CSU campus in the Antelope Valley,  
            was held on Suspense in Senate Appropriations. 



            AB 24 (Block) of 2009, which was a similar bill regarding a  
            new campus in Chula Vista, was vetoed by Governor  
            Schwarzenegger, who argued that the bill was unnecessary.  





          Analysis Prepared by:Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916)  
          319-2081










                                                                      AB 38


                                                                    Page  5