BILL ANALYSIS
AB 346
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 29, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Kevin De Leon, Chair
AB 346 (Torlakson) - As Amended: April 14, 2009
Policy Committee: Education
Vote:11-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill modifies the Joint-Use Facilities program by
authorizing state school facilities funds to be used for
schoolsites that offer instruction in grades K-12 or for
property that is adjacent to the schoolsite and owned by a
government agency, as specified. This measure further prohibits
these modifications from becoming operative until voters approve
a statewide general obligation bond act for the purposes of
constructing and modernizing education facilities at a statewide
election on or after January 1, 2010. Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires a joint-use agreement to construct facilities on land
owned by a government agency to provide that the land will be
leased to the school district for a time period that reflects
the useful life of the facility constructed.
2)Expands the use of state new construction and modernization
funding for a joint-use project to include the construction of
a child health and wellness clinic; career technical building
or shop; science and technology laboratory; science or
historical/cultural center with exhibits or educational
programs that meet the current state content standards;
performing arts center, physical education and outdoor
recreation site development, and a parking facility.
3)Authorizes a school district to include the value of land or
real property upon which the joint-use project is be to built,
as part of the current 50% local match, if either of the
following conditions exists: (a) the district owns the land or
real property and did not pay for or acquire the land or real
property with state funds and (b) the district does not own
AB 346
Page 2
the land or real property, but will be given the land free of
charge.
4)Authorizes a portion of the joint-use partner, up to and not
exceeding 10% of eligible project costs, to include equipment
with an average useful life expectancy of at least 10 years if
the contribution is included as part of a career technical
education (CTE) joint-use project application.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)State school facilities bond cost pressure, likely in the tens
of millions, to expand the use of joint-facility program
funds. Actual costs depend on the number of projects that meet
specified criteria.
2)AB 127 (Nunez), Chapter 35, Statutes of 2006, authorized
Proposition 1D: the Kindergarten-University Public Education
Facilities Bond Act of 2006 for $10.416 billion. The voters
passed Proposition 1D on November 7, 2006. Of the $10.416
billion, $7.329 billion is allocated for K-12 education
facilities. According to the Office of Public School
Construction, as of February 2009, there is $3.5 million
available for the joint-use program under Proposition 1D.
SUMMARY CONTINUED :
5)Requires the joint-use agreement to ensure that the school
district maintains priority for use of the facilities
construction and provides that the facility will be public
with access guaranteed for public use.
6)Establishes the following maximum grant amounts for the
joint-use program: (a) $125,000 per project per elementary
schoolsite; (b) $1.875 million per project per elementary
schoolsite; and (c) $2.5 million per project per high
schoolsite. This bill further requires these grant amounts to
be adjusted annually in the same manner as new construction
grants.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose . Many argue that the narrow list of projects eligible
for joint-use funding is not adequate and unnecessarily
restricts opportunities to alleviate the conditions
AB 346
Page 3
experienced in communities with a limited availability of
land. Often, these are the same communities that suffer
deficiencies in public services and facilities, such as parks,
recreational centers, cultural arts centers, technology
centers, health clinics and outdoor recreation centers.
According to the author, "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."
2)The Joint-Use Facilities program allows a school district to
utilize funds from a joint-use partner to build a joint-use
project the district would not otherwise be able to build due
to lack of financial resources. The program provides funding
for the new construction or the reconfiguration of existing
school facilities beyond what is necessary for school purposes
and may include funding for multipurpose rooms, gymnasiums,
libraries, child care facilities, or teacher education
facilities to be located on K-12 school sites.
Since 2002, the state has provided via voter approved school
facilities bonds $150 million for the joint-use facilities
program, including Proposition 1D that was passed by voters in
November 2006 ($29 million in new bond funds and $21 million
from inactive programs). Likewise, in July 2008, the State
Allocation Board (SAB) authorized another transfer of $7.6
million in prior bond funds for this program.
3)Should joint-use grant amounts have an annual automatic
increase ? Existing law requires the SAB to adjust annual
per-pupil new construction grants to reflect construction cost
changes, as established in the statewide cost index for class
B construction. This bill requires joint-use grant amounts to
be adjusted in the same manner. However, under the current
CTE Facilities program, grant amounts are not required to be
adjusted annually. The committee may wish to consider whether
or not it is appropriate to require an annual grant increase
for the joint-use program when it is not required for all
state school facility programs.
AB 346
Page 4
4)Previous legislation . SB 35 (Torlakson), which is similar to
this measure, was vetoed in October 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."
This bill limits the local contribution of equipment to CTE
facilities only, not the other additional facilities.
Analysis Prepared by : Kimberly Rodriguez / APPR. / (916)
319-2081