BILL ANALYSIS
AB 346
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 1, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Julia Brownley, Chair
AB 346 (Torlakson) - As Amended: March 24, 2009
SUBJECT : School facilities: Joint-use projects
SUMMARY : Expands the type of projects, partners, and local
contribution that are allowed by the Joint-Use Facilities
Program. Specifically, this bill :
1)Authorizes the joint-use funds to construct facilities
adjacent to a kindergarten and grades 1-12 (K-12) schoolsite
that is owned by a state or local governmental entity.
2)Requires the joint-use agreement to construct facilities on
land owned by a state or local governmental agency to provide
that the land be leased to the school district for a time
period that reflects the useful life of the facility
constructed.
3)Expands the types of joint-use projects authorized for funding
to include a child health and wellness clinic, career
technical building or shop, science and technology laboratory,
science center with exhibits or educational program that meet
current state content standards, historical or cultural
education center with exhibits or educational programs that
meet current state content standards, performing arts center,
physical education and outdoor recreation site development,
and parking facility.
4)Authorizes a school district to enter into a joint-use
agreement with one or a combination of existing authorized
entities. Adds as an authorized local joint-use partner, an
entity renting or leasing school facilities through the local
joint use program, which includes other school districts;
educational agencies, except private educational institutions
which maintain kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive;
governmental units; nonprofit organizations; community
agencies; professional agencies; commercial and noncommercial
firms; corporations; partnerships; businesses; and
individuals. Specifies that prior to entering into a
joint-use agreement, the local governing board shall determine
all of the following:
AB 346
Page 2
a) The shared use of the facility will not interfere with
the educational program or activities of a school or class
conducted on the real property or in a building;
b) The shared use of the facility will not jeopardize the
safety of the pupils of the school; and
c) The shared use of the facility and the joint-use
agreement benefit the school district and the public at
large through beneficial and efficient land use, through a
savings, or with the generation of revenue for the school
district.
5)Authorizes the inclusion of the value of land or real property
as part of the local contribution for a joint-use project if
the land or real property is district property not paid or
acquired with state funds, or if the district does not own the
land or real property but will be given the land free of
charge.
6)Clarifies that a school district can provide the full 50
percent local match from a local bond that specifies that the
proceeds of the sale are to be used for joint use projects in
general, rather than for specified projects.
7)Authorizes a portion of the joint-use partner's contribution,
up to 10 percent of eligible project costs, to include
equipment with an average useful life expectancy of at least
10 years if the contribution is part of a career technical
education joint-use project.
8)Specifies that a facility created by the joint-use agreement
shall be a public facility with access to the facility
guaranteed for public use and requires the joint-use agreement
to ensure that the school district maintains priority for use
of the facilities.
9)Specifies that a Joint-Use Facilities Project grant shall not
exceed $1.25 million per project per elementary schoolsite,
$1.875 million per project per middle schoolsite, or $2.5
million per project per high schoolsite. Requires the grant
amounts to be adjusted annually for construction cost changes.
EXISTING LAW :
AB 346
Page 3
1)Establishes the Joint-Use Facilities program within the School
Facility Program (SFP) for both school and community purposes
to improve academic achievement.
2)Specifies that a joint-use project is a part of an application
for new construction funding and will increase the size or
extra cost of the project.
3)Specifies that the joint-use project proposes to either
reconfigure existing school buildings or construct new school
buildings or both, and the project will be located at a school
that does not have the type of facility for which funds are
requested or the existing facility is inadequate.
4)Specifies that an eligible joint-use project includes a
multipurpose room, gymnasium, child care facility, library, or
teacher education facility.
5)Specifies the eligibility requirements for funding, including:
a) The school district has entered into a joint-use
agreement with a governmental agency, public community
college, public college or university, or a nonprofit
organization approved by the State Allocation Board (SAB).
b) The joint-use agreement specifies the method of sharing
capital and operating costs, relative responsibilities for
the operation and staffing of the facility, and the manner
in which the safety of the pupils will be ensured.
c) The joint-use agreement specifies the amount of the
contribution to be made by the school district and the
joint-use partner toward the 50% local share. Requires the
joint-use partner to contribute no less than 25% of
eligible project costs, unless the school district has
passed a local bond which specifies that such funds are to
be use for the joint-use project, in which case the
district may opt to provide up to the full 50% local share.
6)Requires the SAB to establish standards for determining the
amount of supplemental grant funding to be made available for
each project.
7)Requires the SAB to annually adjust grant levels according to
AB 346
Page 4
the statewide cost index for class B construction to reflect
construction cost changes.
8)Provides that the provisions of this bill shall become
operative only if the voters approve a statewide general
obligation bond act for the purpose of providing aid to school
districts to construct and modernize educational facilities at
a statewide election on or after January 1, 2010.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS : Background . AB 16 (Hertzberg), Chapter 33, Statutes
of 2002, established the joint-use program and allocated $50
million each from Proposition 47, passed by voters in 2002, and
Proposition 55, passed by voters in 2004. AB 16, developed by a
Senate and Assembly conference committee, limited the use of
joint-use funds to a multipurpose room, gymnasium, child care
facility, library, or teacher education facility. The bill also
required the projects to be part of the schoolsite, and limited
joint-use partners to governmental agencies, public community
colleges, public colleges or universities, or nonprofit
organizations approved by the SAB. All the funds from
Proposition 47 and Proposition 55 have been apportioned.
Proposition 1D, the Kindergarten-University Public Education
Facilities Bond Act of 2006, passed by voters in November, 2006,
provided $29 million for this purpose and authorized the
transfer of $21 million from unused Leased Purchase Program
funds for joint-use projects. AB 127 also authorized the
transfer of any remaining funds derived from the sale of bonds
issued or before January 1, 2006 to be transferred to any SFP
program. The SAB has increased the program by a total of $23
million through this authorization. As of March 25, 2009, a
total of $8.5 million remain.
This bill expands joint-use projects to sites adjacent to a
schoolsite if the land is owned by a state or local
governmental agency and expands the type of projects allowable
to include career technical building or shop, science and
technology laboratory, science center with exhibits or
educational program that meet current state content standards,
historical or cultural center with exhibits or educational
program that meet current state content standards, performing
arts center, physical education and outdoor recreation site
development, and parking facility.
AB 346
Page 5
This bill also provides more flexibility in negotiations with a
joint-use partner by expanding the type of contribution a
joint-use partner can provide to include, up to 10 percent of
eligible project costs, equipment with an average useful life
expectancy of at least 10 years if the project is a career
technical education facility.
AB 346 is substantially similar to SB 35 (Torlakson), which was
vetoed by the Governor in 2007 with the following message:
"I am supportive of the joint-use facilities projects when they
actually encourage creative mutually beneficial relationships
between school districts and community partners. However, I am
concerned that this bill would expand the Joint-Use Facilities
Program (Program) without ensuring that any additional funding
will be available for its purposes.
Furthermore, the Program's intent to fund joint-use ventures
with equal local and State contributions could be undermined if
joint-use partners were able to contribute something other than
fiscal resources, such as equipment with a 10-year useful life,
where as the State share of the project is being funded with
30-year General Obligation Bonds.
Finally, any changes to the Program should be debated within the
context of a future bond measure, to assure that these projects
are not funded at the expense of other educational facility
priorities."
AB 346 varies from last year's SB 35 in the following ways:
1)AB 346 authorizes construction of joint-use facilities on
property owned by a state governmental entity adjacent to a
K-12 schoolsite. SB 36 limited the authority to local
governmental entities.
2)AB 346 expands joint-use partners to include professional
agencies, commercial and noncommercial firms, corporations,
partnerships, businesses, and individuals.
3)AB 346 does not authorize a joint-use partner to contribute
less than 25 percent while SB 35 did.
4)AB 346 limits the 10 percent of contribution of equipment only
AB 346
Page 6
to career technical education projects while SB 35 provided
the authorization for all projects.
Intent of program . Over the last year, the SAB has questioned
the legitimacy of some of the joint-use partners used in the
applications for funding. For example, while district education
foundations do meet the eligibility criteria as a nonprofit, SAB
members questioned whether they meet the intent of the program.
The intent of the Joint-Use Facilities Program is to expand
partnerships with and facilities use to public higher education,
local governments, and community organizations to benefit the
local community. SAB members were concerned that educational
foundations are simply extensions of a school or school district
and therefore do not meet the intent of expanding partnerships
with community organizations or local governmental entities. At
the February, 2008 Board meeting, the SAB adopted regulations to
specify that a nonprofit organization joint partner must operate
programs and services for the community and pay for additional
ongoing operational costs or program services associated with
the joint-use purposes and/or a minimum of 25 percent of the
project costs.
This bill expands partnerships to entities renting or leasing
school facilities through the local joint-use program. While
many of these entities are already authorized partners
(educational institutions, governmental agencies), this
provision expands the types of partners to include private, for
profit entities, except for private K-12 schools, professional
agencies, and individuals. It can be argued that private, for
profit entities and individuals also do not meet the spirit and
intent of the program. Moreover, depending on how the private,
for profit entity and individual use the facility, who uses it,
and for what purpose the facility is used for, districts may be
violating California's Constitution prohibiting any public
agency from making "any gift of any public money or thing of
value to any individual, municipal or other corporation
whatever." Staff recommends striking lines 33 through 39 on page
4 and lines 1 through 6 on page 5.
The sponsor, Coalition for Adequate School Housing (CASH),
argues that private, for profit entities can participate in the
non-funding local joint use program - which enables private and
public parties to rent or lease public school facilities - and
therefore should be authorized to participate in the funding
program.
AB 346
Page 7
Local bond . Current law requires the joint-use partner to
provide 25 percent of the 50 percent local match, but allows the
districts to pay the full 50 percent through local bond funds if
the bond specifies that proceeds shall be used for the joint-use
project. This bill changes the requirement that the local bond
specify the project and instead authorizes the bond language to
say that proceeds from the sale of bond funds shall be used for
joint-use projects generally.
Funding caps . Funding caps for projects serving elementary ($1
million), middle ($1.5 million), and high ($2 million) pupils
are established by the SAB through regulations. According to
the author, "since these regulatory caps were established, they
have not been adjusted for increased construction costs. OPSC
[Office of Public School Construction] found that the base
per-pupil grants, as well as the square-footage allowances for
Joint-Use Projects, have been increased by approximately 33
percent (2003-2008) in accordance with the Class B Construction
Cost Index [CCI]. AB 346 provides a 25% increase to the current
funding caps with the requirement to adjust them annually per
the CCI." This bill proposes to increase the grants to $1.25
million for elementary school projects, $1.875 million for
middle school projects and $2.5 million for high school
projects. Current law requires the SAB to adjust per pupil
grants annually using a Class B Construction Cost Index. This
bill provides the same annual adjustment to this program.
Arguments in Support . The author states, "The traditional
education model in California is evolving where the core
instructional spaces and traditional facilities may no longer be
adequate or appropriate to meet the educational needs of a given
community. Allowing for joint enterprises to build the
aforementioned facilities, in partnership with the State, seeks
to maximize the use of limited local and state resources."
Prior Legislation. In addition to SB 35, SB 1677 (Torlakson)
was a similar bill that was vetoed by the Governor in 2006.
Earlier versions of AB 2446 (Montanez), introduced in 2004,
added cultural arts center, recreational center, technology
center, health clinic, park, preschool facilities, or athletic
field as eligible joint-use facilities. The version vetoed by
the Governor removed teacher education facilities as an eligible
joint-use facility project and allowed park and preschool
AB 346
Page 8
facilities as eligible joint-use facilities. The Governor
vetoed the bill stating that there are higher priority needs for
school bond funds, including relieving overcrowding.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
American Heart Association
Antioch Unified School District
Coalition for Adequate School Housing (sponsor)
California Immigrant Policy Center
California Pan-Ethnic Health Network
California Park & Recreation Society
California School Boards Association
California School Health Centers Association
Long Beach Unified School District
Los Angeles Unified School District
San Francisco Unified School District
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by : Sophia Kwong Kim / ED. / (916) 319-2087