BILL ANALYSIS
AB 346
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 346 (Torlakson)
As Amended June 1, 2009
Majority vote
EDUCATION 11-0 APPROPRIATIONS 13-3
-------------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Brownley, Nestande, |Ayes:|De Leon, Ammiano, Charles |
| |Ammiano, | |Calderon, Davis, Fuentes, |
| |Arambula, Buchanan, | |Hall, John A. Perez, Price, |
| |Carter, Eng, | |Skinner, Solorio, Audra |
| |Garrick, Miller, Solorio, | |Strickland, Torlakson, |
| |Torlakson | |Krekorian |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+----------------------------|
| | |Nays:|Nielsen, Duvall, Harkey |
| | | | |
-------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Expands the type of projects 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)Specifies that the district has entered into a joint-use
AB 346
Page 2
agreement with one or a combination of the following:
a) A governmental agency;
b) A public community college, a public college, or a
public university; or,
c) A nonprofit organization approved by the State
Allocation Board (SAB).
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%
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% 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.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, state school facilities bond cost pressure, likely in
the tens of millions of dollars. Actual costs depend on the
number of projects that meet the criteria of the bill.
AB 346
Page 3
COMMENTS : AB 16 (Hertzberg), Chapter 33, Statutes of 2002,
established the Joint-Use Facilities 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 School
Facilities Program line item. The SAB has increased the
Joint-Use program by a total of $23 million through this
authorization. As of March 25, 2009, a total of $8.5 million
remain for joint-use projects.
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.
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% 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
AB 346
Page 4
vetoed by the Governor in 2007, but varies from 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 does not authorize a joint-use partner to contribute
less than 25% while SB 35 did.
3)AB 346 limits the 10% of contribution of equipment only to
career technical education projects while SB 35 provided the
authorization for all projects.
Current law requires the joint-use partner to provide 25% of the
50% local match, but allows the districts to pay the full 50%
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 indicate that proceeds from the
sale of bond funds shall be used for joint-use projects
generally.
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. Prior
versions of this bill provided the same annual adjustment to
this program, but this provision was deleted by the Assembly
Appropriations Committee.
AB 346
Page 5
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."
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
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.
Analysis Prepared by : Sophia Kwong Kim / ED. / (916) 319-2087
FN: 0001257