BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1572
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 4, 2016
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Lorena Gonzalez, Chair
AB
1572 (Campos) - As Amended April 21, 2016
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Policy |Education |Vote:|5 - 0 |
|Committee: | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: YesReimbursable:
Yes
SUMMARY:
This bill requires a public, noncharter school, to provide free
transportation to a pupil attending a school that receives Title
1 federal funding. Specifically, this bill:
1)Revises existing law governing the authority of a school
district to contract and pay for the transportation of all
AB 1572
Page 2
pupils to instead authorize this transportation to be provided
only to middle and high school pupils. Further requires the
vehicle for this type of transportation be driven by a public
employee of a municipally-owned transit system (excludes
private transportation contracts).
2)Entitles a student attending a public, noncharter school that
receives Title I federal funding, to receive free
transportation to and from school under the following
conditions:
a) The pupil resides more than one-half mile from the
school.
b) The neighborhood through which the pupil must travel to
get to school is unsafe, as defined by the plan developed
by the school district. Factors contributing to unsafe
travel include: stray dogs, lack of sidewalks, known gang
activity, presence of environmental problems and hazards,
required crossings of freeways or busy intersections, or
other reasons documented by stakeholders in the plan.
3)Requires school districts not currently providing
transportation to all pupils attending schools that receive
Title 1 federal funding, to implement a plan to ensure that
all entitled pupils, as specified, receive free
transportation. Requires the plan to accommodate special
rights of homeless youth in existing law and to be developed
in consultation with various stakeholders.
AB 1572
Page 3
4)Requires transportation provided to students in Title I
schools to be provided by a public employee. Authorizes the
school district to partner with a municipality-owned transit
system to provide the transportation to middle school and high
school pupils if the employees are public employees, if the
transit system can verify consistent routes and schedules to
and from home, and the system does not charge more than a
marginal cost for each transit pass.
5)Specifies nothing in the bill prevents a local transportation
agency from providing no-cost transit passes to pupils
attending Title 1 schools.
6)Establishes the Transportation and Access to Public School
Fund in the State Treasury and makes all transportation
services provided by this bill reimbursable from this fund.
Allocates monies from this fund to the California Department
of Education (CDE). Requires the Superintendent of Public
Instruction (SPI) allocate funding to school districts
starting in the 2017-18 fiscal year, pursuant to a process
established by the SPI, and contingent upon an appropriation
in the budget act or another statute.
FISCAL EFFECT:
1)Proposition 98/GF costs pressures, potentially in the millions
of dollars, to provide free transportation to Title I students
in need of a safe route to school as specified by the bill. In
2014-15, there were approximately 3.9 million students
attending 6,457 schools that received Title I funds. The
costs of providing transportation will vary by school and by
the number of children that meet the requirements for free
transportation. The provision of free transportation is
contingent upon an appropriation of funds, either by the
AB 1572
Page 4
budget act or another statute. The Governor's budget does not
propose funding for this purpose and the Legislative budget
committees have not considered this issue.
2)General Fund administrative costs to the California Department
of Education (CDE) of approximately $140,000, starting in
2017-18, if funds are provided to implement the program. CDE
anticipates increased workload associated with planning,
implementing and sustaining the newly created Transportation
and Access to Public School Fund. Specific workload includes:
establishing allocation criteria, conforming documents and
website updates, and providing technical assistance and
guidance to LEAs.
COMMENTS:
1)Purpose. This bill, sponsored by the Western Center on Law and
Poverty, the Children's Defense Fund, and Youth Justice
Coalition, proposes to increase opportunities for
disadvantaged youth by ensuring students who attend the
poorest schools in California do not face barriers to getting
to school. The author cites a 2015 report by the California
Attorney General which found the inability to afford
transportation to and from school is one of the most
frequently cited barriers that low-income youth face in
attending school. School buses are no longer sufficient, as
their funding is continually being reduced and routes are
being consolidated or cut. A survey of Oakland youth found
that 61% of students reported that they sometimes use their
lunch money to ride the bus. According to the author, in
order to prevent low-income and disadvantaged children from
being trapped in the cycle of poverty, underemployment and
incarceration, California needs to enact comprehensive
policies to remove structural barriers that keep them from
obtaining an education, such as the lack of adequate
transportation.
AB 1572
Page 5
2)Prior legislation. This bill is similar to AB 891 (Campos) of
2015, which was held in on the Suspense file in this
committee. This bill differs from AB 891 since it targets
free transportation services to students attending Title 1
funded schools rather than students eligible for free and
reduced price meals (FRPM). Using Title 1 as a measure could
reach a slightly larger group of students. According to the
CDE, in 2014-15, there were 3.9 million students in schools
that received Title 1 funds. In contrast, there are 3.7
million pupils eligible for FRPM.
Another component that is different in this bill is the
funding source. AB 891 required local educational agencies to
use existing funds to provide transportation. AB 1572 makes
requirements contingent upon funding in the annual Budget Act
or another statute, for transportation that is provided by
public employees, either hired by the district or a transit
authority.
Finally, AB 891 required transportation to be provided based
on distance and if the area the student must travel is unsafe
due to stray dogs, no sidewalks or gang activity. AB 1572
expands the conditions that may be considered unsafe but makes
the determination of unsafe conditions based on a plan,
developed in consultation with specified stakeholders.
AB 1572
Page 6
3)Opposition. The Orange County Department of Education (OCDE)
is opposed to this bill. According to OCDE, approximately
three-fourths of Santa Ana Unified School District students
(42,000) meet the requirements of the bill and would qualify
for free transportation. It is estimated providing this
service for free would cost the district $238 million
annually. Santa Ana USD indicates they would need to acquire
additional buses, house additional bus fleets and hire
drivers. The cost to provide one school bus is $190,000. The
district indicates offering city bus passes could be an option
but consultation and planning would need to occur with the
Orange County Transit Authority ensure this is a feasible
option.
Analysis Prepared by:Misty Feusahrens / APPR. / (916)
319-2081