BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó






                                                                       AB 496


                                                                       Page A


          ASSEMBLY THIRD READING


          AB  
          496 (Rendon)


          As Amended  May 28, 2015


          Majority vote


           ------------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Committee       |Votes |Ayes                |Noes                  |
          |                |      |                    |                      |
          |                |      |                    |                      |
          |----------------+------+--------------------+----------------------|
          |Education       |7-0   |O'Donnell, Chávez,  |                      |
          |                |      |Kim, McCarty,       |                      |
          |                |      |Santiago, Thurmond, |                      |
          |                |      |Weber               |                      |
          |                |      |                    |                      |
          |----------------+------+--------------------+----------------------|
          |Appropriations  |17-0  |Gomez, Bigelow,     |                      |
          |                |      |Bonta, Calderon,    |                      |
          |                |      |Chang, Daly,        |                      |
          |                |      |Eggman, Gallagher,  |                      |
          |                |      |                    |                      |
          |                |      |                    |                      |
          |                |      |Eduardo Garcia,     |                      |
          |                |      |Gordon, Holden,     |                      |
          |                |      |Jones, Quirk,       |                      |
          |                |      |Rendon, Wagner,     |                      |
          |                |      |Weber, Wood         |                      |
          |                |      |                    |                      |
          |                |      |                    |                      |
           ------------------------------------------------------------------- 












                                                                       AB 496


                                                                       Page B



          SUMMARY:  Requires the California Department of Education (CDE) to  
          identify available sources of funding to fund school water quality  
          and infrastructure.  Specifically, this bill:  


          1)Requires the CDE to consult with the State Water Resources  
            Control Board's (SWRCB) Division of Drinking Water Programs to  
            identify available sources of funding, including, but not  
            limited to, funding from Proposition 1, approved by the voters  
            at the November 4, 2014, statewide General Election; funds for  
            safe drinking water programs administered by the CDE, the  
            Department of Public Health, the Department of Water Resources,  
            and the SWRCB;  other state funding; and federal funding  
            available to fund school water quality and infrastructure.  


          2)Requires the CDE to post the information collected on the CDE's  
            Internet Web site.


          3)Authorizes the CDE to receive funds transferred from any  
            available state and federal source, to be allocated by the CDE  
            to school districts for the purpose of complying with the  
            requirement for schools to provide access to free, fresh  
            drinking water during meal time.  


          4)Authorizes school districts to use funds received for water  
            quality projects including, but not limited to, water treatment,  
            water facilities restructuring, water filling stations, and  
            maintenance of water facilities.  


          5)Finds and declares that recent studies show that unsafe drinking  
            water plagues school water systems at a startling rate, that  
            some schools have sealed pipes and turned off drinking fountains  
            due to lead piping and other water system contaminants, and that  
            schools need a one-stop shop where information and funding is  











                                                                       AB 496


                                                                       Page C


            available for clean drinking water programs.


          FISCAL EFFECT:  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee, General Fund administrative cost to CDE of  
          approximately $400,000, to research available resources, consult  
          with the appropriate outside agencies and perform other  
          administrative tasks related to the identification and provision  
          of funds for school water quality and infrastructure. 


          COMMENTS:  Access to free, fresh water.  Current law requires  
          school districts to provide free, fresh drinking water during meal  
          times in the food service areas.  A school district may provide  
          cups and containers of water or bottled water to comply with this  
          requirement.  The goal of this bill is to reduce the consumption  
          of sugar-sweetened beverage while increasing the consumption of  
          water in an effort to reduce obesity among children.  According to  
          a 2012 study on the water access law conducted by researchers at  
          the University of California, San Francisco, in conjunction with  
          the California Food Policy Advocates and ChangeLab Solutions,  one  
          in four schools had not complied with the law in 2011.  Of those  
          that did comply, drinking fountains were cited as the most common  
          source of free drinking water in schools.  One of the reasons  
          cited by schools for not complying was concerns about water safety  
          and quality.  Among others, the report recommended facilitating  
          and supporting the development of good models for purchase,  
          installation, and maintenance of a range of water delivery  
          systems, from short-term solutions to permanent solutions, and  
          requiring annual water-quality testing at the tap of every  
          school's drinking water.  


          What does this bill do?  This bill requires the CDE to consult  
          with the SWRCB to identify available funding sources that schools  
          can access to improve drinking water quality.  Some of the funding  
          sources the CDE is required to explore include Proposition 1, the  
          water bond passed by voters in November 2014, which provided $520  
          million for expenditures, grants, and loans for projects that  











                                                                       AB 496


                                                                       Page D


          improve water quality or help provide clean, safe, and reliable  
          drinking water to all Californians.  The bill also requires the  
          CDE to post the information on its Internet Web site.       


          Water quality in schools.  According to an Associated Press  
          evaluation of data from the Environmental Protection Agency,  
          schools in California reported the most federal drinking water  
          violations from 1998 to 2008 in schools with their own water  
          supplies.  The contaminant most frequently identified in water was  
          coliform bacteria, followed by lead and cooper, arsenic and  
          nitrates.<1>  According to the SWRCB, while the "majority of  
          Californians are drinking water that meets water quality  
          standards, many small water systems, both that serve residential  
          communities as well as noncommunity facilities, such as factories  
          and rural schools, struggle to achieve compliance.<2>"  Small  
          water systems have difficulties with upgrading treatment  
          facilities due to costs.  


          The author states, "Limited funding and a growing list of needs to  
          repair school infrastructure causes clean drinking water to fall  
          to the wayside.  School districts may be unaware of various State  
          and federal funding streams available to them.  Districts need a  
          one-stop shop where information and funding is available for clean  
          drinking water programs.  Even if water from a local utility is  
          clean, contamination happens as chemicals such as copper, lead,  
          and arsenic seep into water supplies from school facilities.   
          Water served in cafeterias or school water fountains may contain  
          these harmful chemicals."  


          ----------------------------
          <1>


           "Drinking Water Unsafe at Thousands of Schools," Associated  
          Press, September 25, 2009.  
          <2> "Safe Drinking Water Plan for California (draft)," State Water  
          Resources Control Board, October 2014.










                                                                       AB 496


                                                                       Page E




          Analysis Prepared by:                                               
                          Sophia Kwong Kim / ED. / (916) 319-2087  FN:  
          0000784