BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                      AB 1000


                                                                      Page  1





        ASSEMBLY THIRD READING


        AB  
        1000 (Weber)


        As Amended  May 28, 2015


        Majority vote


         ------------------------------------------------------------------- 
        |Committee       |Votes |Ayes                |Noes                  |
        |                |      |                    |                      |
        |                |      |                    |                      |
        |----------------+------+--------------------+----------------------|
        |Higher          |13-0  |Medina, Baker,      |                      |
        |Education       |      |Bloom, Chávez,      |                      |
        |                |      |Harper, Irwin,      |                      |
        |                |      |Jones-Sawyer,       |                      |
        |                |      |Levine, Linder,     |                      |
        |                |      |Low, Santiago,      |                      |
        |                |      |Weber, Williams     |                      |
        |                |      |                    |                      |
        |----------------+------+--------------------+----------------------|
        |Appropriations  |17-0  |Gomez, Bigelow,     |                      |
        |                |      |Bonta, Calderon,    |                      |
        |                |      |Chang, Daly,        |                      |
        |                |      |Eggman, Gallagher,  |                      |
        |                |      |                    |                      |
        |                |      |                    |                      |
        |                |      |Eduardo Garcia,     |                      |
        |                |      |Gordon, Holden,     |                      |
        |                |      |Jones, Quirk,       |                      |
        |                |      |Rendon, Wagner,     |                      |
        |                |      |Weber, Wood         |                      |
        |                |      |                    |                      |








                                                                      AB 1000


                                                                      Page  2





        |                |      |                    |                      |
         ------------------------------------------------------------------- 


        SUMMARY:  Establishes various requirements for the implementation  
        and rescission of California State University (CSU) student success  
        fees (fees).  Specifically, this bill:  


        1)Prohibits a CSU campus or the CSU Chancellor from approving a new  
          student success fee or increasing an existing fee until the  
          campus:


           a)   Undertakes a consultation process to inform students on a  
             fee's uses, impacts, and costs.


           b)   Holds a binding student election and a majority of students  
             voting vote affirmatively.  The fee would then be adopted  
             contingent on final approval by the Chancellor.


           c)   Informs students that the fee may be rescinded by a majority  
             vote of the students, but not less than six months after a vote  
             to implement the fee.  Rescission is not allowed, however, for  
             the portion of the fee committed to support long-term  
             obligations.   


        2)Stipulates that a fee proposal may not be brought before the  
          student body more than once per academic year.


        3)Provides that a success fee in place as of January 1, 2016, may be  
          rescinded by student vote only after six years have elapsed  
          following implementation.










                                                                      AB 1000


                                                                      Page  3





        4)Requires the Chancellor to:


           a)   Ensure there is majority student representation in success  
             fee oversight groups, an annual report to the chancellor from  
             each campus on its success fee, and a transparent process for  
             allocation of success fee revenues.


           b)   Report annually on December 1, to the Legislature and the  
             Department of Finance, a summary of fees adopt or rescinded in  
             the prior academic year, and on the uses of proposed and  
             implemented fees.


        EXISTING LAW:  


        1)Prohibits a campus-based mandatory student fee at the CSU  
          established through a student vote from being reallocated without  
          an affirmative student vote unless a majority of the members of  
          either the student body or a campus fee advisory committee voting  
          on the fee support the reallocation and the fee authorized the  
          alternative allocation mechanism. (Education Code Section 89711)


        2)Prohibits a CSU campus or CSU Chancellor from approving a student  
          success fee before January 1, 2016, and requires the CSU  
          Chancellor to conduct a review and report on student success fees  
          currently in place, as follows.  (Education Code Section 89712) 


           a)   Requires, during the 2014-15 fiscal year, the CSU Chancellor  
             to conduct a review of the CSU Student Fee Policy relating to  
             student success fees and recommend to the trustees changes to  
             the fee policy; and requires the review to consider: 


             i)     The approval process for student success fees, including  








                                                                      AB 1000


                                                                      Page  4





               the benefit of using a student election or the consultative  
               process in the approval process; 
             ii)    The need for statewide policies governing a student  
               election, the consultative process, or both, for approving a  
               proposed student success fee; 


             iii)   The means to improve transparency and accountability  
               regarding a campus' use of student success fee funds for the  
               benefit of members of the campus' community;


             iv)    The development of an annual report describing the use  
               of student success fee funds by each campus in the prior  
               academic year, to be posted on each campus' Internet Web  
               site;


             v)     The approval of a statewide policy to prohibit a campus  
               from implementing a student success fee for a period  
               exceeding five years unless a continuance of that fee is  
               approved by an affirmative vote of the majority of the  
               student body voting;


             vi)    The impact of student success fees on campuses' academic  
               programs and services available for students, including, but  
               not necessarily limited to, low-income students; and, 


             vii)   A provision for financial assistance to offset the cost  
               of the fee for low-income students.


           a)   Requires the CSU Chancellor to report to the Department of  
             Finance and the appropriate fiscal and policy committees by  
             February 1, 2015.
        FISCAL EFFECT:  According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee,  
        the bill's requirements are generally consistent with a recent  








                                                                      AB 1000


                                                                      Page  5





        policy adopted by the CSU Trustees, though placing these  
        requirements in statute would reduce CSU's flexibility to adjust its  
        policy in reaction to reductions in state support. 


        COMMENTS:  A number of CSU campuses have adopted student success  
        fees, which, in some cases, substantially increase the cost of  
        attendance at a CSU.  Since 2008, 12 of the 23 CSU campuses have  
        adopted such fees.  These fees, which were adopted largely in  
        response to significant state funding reductions, are required to be  
        paid by students enrolling in these campuses.  Concern over the  
        amount of these fees, the process used for adoption on campuses, and  
        the impact of the fees on low-income students led to the Legislature  
        placing an 18-month moratorium on new fees and establishing CSU  
        reporting requirements in the 2013-14 Budget Act education trailer  
        bill (SB 860 (Budget and Fiscal Review Committee), Chapter 34,  
        Statutes of 2014).  


        In June 2014, the CSU Board of Trustees (BOT) formed a working group  
        to study the role, process and enactment of student success fees.   
        The working group found that fees had been used in a number of ways  
        by the different campuses.  At some campuses, fees support  
        technology, campus-wide WiFi, library hours, veteran services,  
        career services, athletics and additional otherwise unfunded  
        services.  Some campuses, however, have used these fees to fund  
        educational needs that have traditionally been supported by tuition  
        and state appropriation such as faculty, advisors, counselors and  
        tutors, and to provide more courses.  


        According to the working group, of the 12 campuses with fees, only  
        two had referendums where a majority of students voted in favor of  
        the fee, and one of those two allowed students to vote only if they  
        attended alternative consultation meetings about the proposal.  At a  
        third campus students voted to rejected the proposed fee and the fee  
        was imposed despite the student rejection.  At remaining campuses  
        "alternative consultation" meetings were used instead of student  
        votes.  








                                                                      AB 1000


                                                                      Page  6







        At the January 27-28, 2015, meeting of the CSU Board of Trustees  
        (Trustees), the Trustees adopted a resolution memorializing the  
        final recommendations of the working group.  The resolution requires  
        all of the following:


        1)A binding student vote, where all eligible students are authorized  
          to vote, prior to the implementation of any proposed new student  
          success fee and a rigorous consultation process prior to the vote,  
          students must be informed prior to the vote of their rights to  
          rescind the fee and any limitations surrounding ongoing and/or  
          long-term obligations supported by the fee;


        2)Student success fees currently in place shall remain unchanged,  
          however a new addition to an existing fee must be approved by a  
          binding student vote and the campus must receive approval from the  
          CSU Chancellor's Office on the process.


        3)Student success fees accepted by a majority of students voting may  
          not be implemented without the approval of the CSU Chancellor and  
          the campus president.  If the proposed uses of the fee were  
          historically covered by tuition and state funding, the Chancellor  
          is required to consult with the Board of Trustees.


        4)Student success fees may be rescinded at any time after six years  
          with another binding majority student vote, except that student  
          success fees supporting ongoing and long-term obligations may not  
          be rescinded until the obligation is satisfied.  Current student  
          success fees may not be rescinded until after January 1, 2021;


        5)Student success fee implementation and fee rescinding proposals  
          may not be brought before students more than once per academic  
          year; and,








                                                                      AB 1000


                                                                      Page  7







        6)Each campus is required to have transparent, online accountability  
          protocols that clarify the decision process and allocation of the  
          student success fees, with annual reporting to the Chancellor by  
          October 15th;


        This bill is largely consistent with the requirements of the CSU BOT  
        resolution, the CSU Chancellor's Office is currently in the process  
        of establishing an Executive Order consistent with the requirements  
        of the resolution 




        Analysis Prepared by:                                               
                        Laura Metune / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960  FN:  
        0000747