BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 416|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Bill No: SB 416
Author: Huff (R)
Amended: 8/17/15
Vote: 21
SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE: 8-0, 4/8/15
AYES: Liu, Huff, Block, Hancock, Leyva, Mendoza, Pan, Vidak
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Senate Rule 28.8
SENATE FLOOR: 36-0, 5/11/15 (Consent)
AYES: Allen, Bates, Beall, Berryhill, Block, Cannella, Fuller,
Gaines, Galgiani, Hall, Hancock, Hernandez, Hertzberg, Hill,
Hueso, Huff, Jackson, Lara, Leno, Leyva, McGuire, Mendoza,
Mitchell, Monning, Moorlach, Morrell, Nguyen, Nielsen, Pan,
Pavley, Roth, Runner, Stone, Vidak, Wieckowski, Wolk
NO VOTE RECORDED: Anderson, De León, Liu
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 8/27/15 (Consent) - See last page for
vote
SUBJECT: Public schools: elementary and secondary education
SOURCE: California School Boards Association
DIGEST: This bill repeals numerous provisions of the Education
Code for categorical programs that are considered obsolete or
unnecessary in light of the passage of recent Local Control
Funding Formula (LCFF) legislation.
Assembly Amendments add additional provisions of the Education
Code for programs that are considered obsolete or unnecessary in
light of the passage of LCFF legislation.
SB 416
Page 2
ANALYSIS: Existing law authorizes the LCFF, a new funding
formula that provides base funding for the core educational
needs of all students and supplemental funding for the
additional educational needs of low-income students, English
learners, and foster youth. LCFF funds have limited spending
restrictions, allowing local educational agencies (LEAs)
considerable flexibility to direct resources to best meet their
students' needs.
This bill repeals numerous provisions of the Education Code for
categorical programs that are considered obsolete or unnecessary
in light of the passage of the LCFF. Below are the bill
sections and the general subject matter of the proposed changes.
1) Youth conservation program (SEC. 1)
2) Technical, agricultural, and natural resource conservation
schools (SEC. 2)
3) Cosmetology courses (SEC. 3)
4) Arts work visual and performing arts education (SEC. 4)
5) Agricultural Education (SEC. 5)
6) Schoolbus clean fuel and efficiency demonstration (SEC. 6)
7) Carl Washington School Safety and Violence Prevention Act
(SEC. 7)
8) Deficiencies related to instructional materials, emergency
facilities conditions, and teacher vacancies or
misassignments (SEC. 8)
9) School Safety Violence Protection Act (SEC. 9)
10) Summer school (SEC. 10)
11) Continuous school programs (SEC. 11)
12) Transportation of pupils or parents (SEC. 12)
SB 416
Page 3
13) Transportation allowances for State Special Schools (SEC.
13)
14) Emergency waiver eligibility (SEC. 14)
15) Taxation for Adult Education (SEC. 15)
16) In-service training (SEC. 16)
17) Mathematics staff development (SEC. 17)
18) Education technology staff development (SEC. 18)
19) Personnel Management Assistance Teams (SEC. 19)
20) Teacher Incentive Program of 1990 (SEC. 20)
21) Certificated employee salary schedule increases (SEC. 21)
22) Jack O'Connell Beginning Teacher Salary Incentive Program
(SEC. 22)
23) Emergency conditions, average daily attendance (SEC. 23)
24) Charter school application for federal and state
categorical programs (SEC. 24)
25) Education technology (SEC. 25)
26) Impacted Languages Act of 1984 (SEC. 26)
27) Advanced Placement Program (SEC. 27)
28) Definitions (SEC. 28)
29) Expenditure of funds (SEC. 29)
30) Report to the Legislature (SEC. 30)
31) California Regional Career Guidance Centers (SEC. 31)
SB 416
Page 4
32) Pre-career technical education (SEC. 32)
33) Summer vocational education (SEC. 33-38)
34) Home economics careers technology education (SEC. 39)
35) International Baccalaureate Diploma Program (SEC. 40-42)
36) School-to-career initiatives (SEC. 43)
37) Mathematics improvement program (SEC. 44)
38) Single gender academies pilot program (SEC. 45)
39) County offices of education (SEC. 46)
Background
The LCFF is a significant reform to the state's previous system
of financing K-12 public schools which was composed of revenue
limits and restricted funding for a multitude of categorical
programs. Although LEAs have considerably more flexibility in
how they spend their resources compared to the previous funding
system, the law requires a school district, county office of
education, or charter school:
"...to increase or improve services for unduplicated pupils
[low-
income students, English learners, and foster youth] in
proportion to
the increase in funds apportioned on the basis of the number
and
concentration of unduplicated pupils in the school district,
county
office of education, or charter school."
Under the previous system, revenue limits provided LEAs with
discretionary funding for general education purposes, and
categorical program funding was provided for restricted or
specialized purposes, with each program having unique allocation
and spending requirements. Revenue limits made up about
two-thirds of state funding for schools, while categorical
SB 416
Page 5
program funding made up the remainder. For some time, that
funding system was criticized for being too state-driven,
bureaucratic, complex, inequitable, and based on outdated
allocation methods that did not reflect current student needs.
To ensure accountability for LCFF, the state also mandated that
each LEA develop a local control and accountability plan (LCAP)
that identifies locally determined goals, actions, services, and
expenditures of LCFF funds for each school year in support of
the state educational priorities that are specified in statute,
as well as any additional local priorities. School district
LCAPs are subject to review and approval by county offices of
education. Statute established a process for districts to
receive technical assistance related to their LCAP. The
Superintendent of Public Instruction is authorized to intervene
in a struggling school district under certain conditions.
Comments
Need for the bill. According to the author's office, this bill
removes various Education Code Sections that remain on the books
despite being rendered obsolete by the enactment of the LCFF.
The LCFF removed funding for a number of categorical programs
which still remain codified in the Education Code.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.:YesLocal: No
According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, there will
be no state fiscal impact.
SUPPORT: (Verified8/26/15)
California School Boards Association (source)
OPPOSITION: (Verified8/26/15)
SB 416
Page 6
None received
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 8/27/15
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom,
Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang,
Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle,
Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia,
Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray,
Grove, Hadley, Harper, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones,
Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low,
Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin,
Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Perea,
Quirk, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago,
Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber,
Wilk, Wood, Atkins
NO VOTE RECORDED: Frazier, Williams
Prepared by: Lenin Del Castillo / ED. / (916) 651-4105
8/28/15 8:46:11
**** END ****