BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                    AB 1433


                                                                    Page  1





          Date of Hearing:  April 28, 2015


                       ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION


                                 Jose Medina, Chair


          AB 1433  
          (Gray) - As Introduced February 27, 2015


          SUBJECT:  Higher education facilities:  Recommitment to Higher  
          Education Bond Act of 2016


          SUMMARY:  Enacts the Recommitment to Higher Education Bond Act  
          of 2016.  Specifically, this bill:  


          1)Authorizes an unspecified amount of state general obligation  
            bonds, as scheduled, to provide aid to the California  
            Community Colleges (CCC), the California State University  
            (CSU), the University of California (UC), and the Hastings  
            College of the Law to construct and modernize education  
            facilities.


          2)Specifies that the proceeds of these bonds would be deposited  
            in the 2016 CCC Capital Outlay Bond Fund and the 2016  
            University Capital Outlay Bond Fund, as established by this  
            measure.


          3)Specifies that this bond act would become operative only if  
            approved by the voters during the November 8, 2016 statewide  
            general election; and, provides for the submission to the  
            voters at said election.








                                                                    AB 1433


                                                                    Page  2







          FISCAL EFFECT:  Unknown


          COMMENTS:  Background.  Since the late 1980s, the Legislature  
          has placed on the ballot and voters have approved bonds for  
          public higher education every two to four years.  The last  
          statewide general obligation bond, Proposition 1D (AB 127, Núñez  
          and Perata, Chapter 35, Statutes of 2006), was approved by  
          voters in November 2006, authorizing the sale of $10.4 billion  
          in general obligation bonds of which $3.087 billion was  
          earmarked for higher education facilities.  Of this amount, $1.5  
          billion was provided for CCC facilities, $890 million was  
          provided for UC, and $690 million was provided for CSU.  All  
          Proposition 1D higher education facilities funds have been  
          depleted and K-12 funds have almost been exhausted.

          Since 2006, as the state's fiscal condition continued to  
          deteriorate, legislation needed to authorize education bonds was  
          not enacted.  Instead, since 2008 the higher education segments  
          have received capital funding from lease-revenue bonds through  
          the annual budget acts; however, these funds have met less than  
          half of the segments' capital needs.  Bond funds, whether  
          lease-revenue or G.O., are allocated through the budget process  
          in accordance with the segments' five-year capital facility  
          plans.  

          Additionally, in November 2012, California voters approved  
          Proposition 39 to close a corporate tax loophole and increase  
          the state's annual corporate tax revenues by as much as $1.1  
          billion.  Proposition 39 specified that half of the revenue  
          generated from 2013-2018, up to $550 million, should support  
          energy efficiency and alternative energy projects at public  
          schools, colleges, universities and other public buildings, as  
          well as related public-private partnerships and workforce  
          training.  

          Need for this measure.  According to the author, higher  








                                                                    AB 1433


                                                                    Page  3





          education institutions have found themselves unable to meet  
          enrollment and workforce demands.  The author states,  
          "Additional state funding has been called for but gone  
          unanswered.  From 2007-2013, state support for the UC and CSU  
          feel by 30 percent, even as enrollment grew.  Funding has not  
          kept up with the cost of higher education, and campuses often  
          find themselves falling behind in classroom space and up to date  
          facilities."

          The author contends that higher education is truly a public  
          benefit; and that our students, communities, and entire state  
          benefit from a vibrant public higher education system.  This  
          measure will reinvest in the UC, CSU, and CCC systems for  
          ongoing needs of modernization and construction of educational  
          facilities.   



          Capital needs.  The segments (UC, CSU, and CCC) report the  
          following capital needs:

          1)UC:  Has identified four year needs of approximately $550  
            million per year.  This breaks down to approximately $450  
            million per year for UC general campuses and $100 million for  
            medical centers.

          2)CSU:  Has identified a five year total need of $7 billion for  
            renovation and/or replacement of existing infrastructure and  
            for new buildings to provide growth to increase lecture and  
            laboratory seating capacity.  This breaks down to  
            approximately $400 to $500 million per year.

            To note:  48 percent of their buildings are 40 years old and  
            34 percent are over 50 years old; and, a backlog of their  
            deferred maintenance funding is nearly at $1.8 billion.

          3)CCC:  Has identified a need of approximately $35 billion over  
            the next 10 years for construction and modernization of  
            facilities.  








                                                                    AB 1433


                                                                    Page  4






            To note:  Of the $35 billion needed, the CCC Office of the  
            Chancellor estimates that $19.1 billion of local bond funds  
            remain available, leaving over $15.9 billion in unmet need.   
            This breaks down to approximately $3.2 billion needed from a  
            state bond every two years. 

          Prior and related legislation.  Several bills have been  
          introduced since 2009 in an effort to authorize bond measures to  
          fund facility construction projects for K-12 schools and public  
          postsecondary educational institutions.  These include the  
          following:

          1)AB 148 (Holden), which is awaiting a hearing in the Assembly  
            Education Committee, would, among others, enact the K-14  
            School Investment Bond Act of 2016 to authorize an unspecified  
            amount of state general obligation bonds, as scheduled, to  
            provide aid to school districts, county superintendents of  
            schools, county boards of education, charter schools, and CCC  
            to construct and modernize education facilities.

          2)AB 1088 (O'Donnell), which is awaiting a hearing in the  
            Assembly Education Committee, would, among others, enact the  
            Kindergarten-University Public Education Facilities Bond Act  
            of an unspecified year to authorize an unspecified amount of  
            state general obligation bonds to provide aid to school  
            districts, county superintendents of schools, county boards of  
            education, charter schools, the CCC, the UC, the Hastings  
            College of the Law, and the CSU to construct and modernize  
            education facilities. 

          3)AB 2235 (Buchanan and Hagman), which was introduced in 2014,  
            would have changed the existing School Facility Program and  
            authorize the Kindergarten-University Public Education  
            Facilities Bond Act of 2014 to provide for the issuance of $9  
            billion in general obligation bonds for construction and  
            modernization of education facilities (to become effective  
            only if approved by voters), and require its submission to  
            voters at the November 4, 2014, statewide general election.   








                                                                    AB 1433


                                                                    Page  5





            AB 2235 was held in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

          4)AB 41 (Buchanan), which was introduced in 2013, expressed the  
            Legislature's intent to place a Kindergarten-University  
            facilities bond on the 2014 ballot.  AB 41 was held by the  
            author in the Assembly Education Committee.

          5)SB 45 (Corbett), which was introduced in 2013, expressed the  
            Legislature's intent to place a Kindergarten-University  
            facilities bond on the next statewide general election.  The  
            bill was held by the author in the Senate Rules Committee.

          6)SB 301 (Liu), which was introduced in 2013, expressed the  
            Legislature's intent to place a Kindergarten-University  
            facilities bond on the 2014 ballot.  SB 301 was held by the  
            author in the Senate Rules Committee.

          7)AB 331 (Brownley), which was introduced in 2011, expressed the  
            Legislature's intent to place a Kindergarten-University  
            facilities bond on the 2012 ballot.  AB 331 was held in the  
            Assembly Appropriations Committee in 2012.

          8)AB 822 (Block), which was introduced in 2011, would have  
            placed a higher education facilities bond on the November 2012  
            ballot.  AB 822 was held in the Assembly Appropriations  
            Committee in 2012.  

          9)AB 220 (Brownley), which was introduced in 2009, would have  
            placed a $6.1 billion Kindergarten-University facilities bond  
            on the November 2010 ballot.  AB 220 was held in the Senate  
            Appropriations Committee. 

          10)SB 271 (Ducheny), which was introduced in 2009, would have  
            placed a $8.6 billion higher education facilities bond on the  
            November 2010 ballot.  SB 271 was held in the Senate  
            Appropriations Committee.

          REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:









                                                                    AB 1433


                                                                    Page  6








          Support


          California Community Colleges Chancellor's Office


          California State University


          Community College Facility Coalition


          University of California




          Opposition


          None on file.




          Analysis Prepared by:Jeanice Warden / HIGHER ED. / (916)  
          319-3960

















                                                                    AB 1433


                                                                    Page  7