BILL ANALYSIS
AB 264
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB 264 (Mullin)
As Amended September 8, 2003
Majority vote
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |77-0 |(June 4, 2003) |SENATE: |36-0 |(September 9, |
| | | | | |2003) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: ED.
SUMMARY : Allows a school district to deposit up to 25% of the
proceeds of the sale of surplus school real property, excluding
any interest earned thereon, into the school district general
fund and to use those proceeds for any one-time expenditure of
the school district, except for salaries and benefits, if
certain criteria are met.
The Senate amendments :
1)Delete the provision allowing specified surplus property sale
funds to be used for the costs of temporary employees.
2)Specify that the State Allocation Board (SAB) shall review and
may disapprove the determination of the governing board of a
school district that property is surplus property if any of
the proceeds from the sale of that property are used for
purposes other than capital outlay or maintenance costs.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Requires that funds from the sale of surplus school real
property be used for capital outlay or for costs of
maintenance of prescribed school district property.
2)Allows that proceeds from a lease of a school district
property with an option to purchase may be deposited into a
restricted fund for the routine repair of district facilities
for up to a five-year period.
3)Permits a school district to deposit proceeds from a sale of
school district property or lease of a school district
property with an option to buy in its general fund for use for
AB 264
Page 2
any general fund purpose if the school district governing
board and SAB have determined that the district has no
anticipated need for additional sites or building construction
for the five-year period following the sale or lease; and that
the district has no major deferred maintenance requirements.
4)Requires SAB, under the Leroy Green Act, to allocate to
applicant school districts prescribed per-unhoused-pupil state
funding for construction and modernization of school
facilities.
5)Allows school districts to establish a Deferred Maintenance
Fund (DMF) for the purpose of specified major repair or
replacement of school facilities. SAB is required to
apportion, utilizing a specified formula, matching funds to
school districts for DMF.
6)Defines major maintenance, for the purpose of certifying that
a school district has publicly approved an ongoing and major
maintenance plan as required for state school facility project
funding, as all actions necessary to keep roofing, siding,
painting, floor and window coverings, fixtures, cabinets,
heating and cooling systems, landscaping, fences, and other
items designated by the governing board of the district in
good repair.
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill allowed a school district
to deposit up to 25% of the proceeds of the sale of surplus
school real property, excluding any interest earned thereon,
into the school district general fund and to use those proceeds
for any one-time expenditure of the school district, including,
but not limited to, the costs of temporary employees.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, unknown, potentially multi-million dollar school
facility bond cost pressure.
COMMENTS : The author contends that as California faces an
unprecedented fiscal crisis, it is necessary for the state and
local agencies to examine the priorities that are essential to
the core of each agency's function. Public schools maintaining
kindergarten and grades 1 to 12, inclusive, must be given relief
from restrictive and costly state mandates so that school
districts will have the operational and fiscal flexibility to
AB 264
Page 3
manage their budgets within the context of the current budget
crisis.
According to the author, the provisions in current law make the
assumption that if a school district utilizes funds derived from
the sale of school property for general fund purposes, they do
not have any deferred maintenance needs and therefore should not
receive any DMF grants the next five years. The author believes
this assumption is not true, as many schools have deferred
maintenance needs that extend beyond that which is immediately
required, but nonetheless still are critical needs. This bill
acknowledges that schools will continue to have deferred
maintenance needs, but in times of extraordinary budget
constraints, school districts should be allowed to utilize a
portion of available funds to prevent cuts to programs without
loss of any future DMF grants.
Analysis Prepared by : Mavonne Garrity / ED. / (916) 319-2087
FN:
0004024