BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  AB 1476
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   April 29, 2009

                           ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
                                Julia Brownley, Chair
                     AB 1476 (Cook) - As Amended:  April 16, 2009
           
          SUBJECT  :   School facilities:  material inaccuracies

           SUMMARY  :  Requires the State Allocation Board (SAB) to, upon a  
          finding by the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) that  
          repayment of funds for committing material inaccuracy has caused  
          or will cause a school district an extreme financial hardship,  
          extend the repayment period by an additional period of up to  
          five years, based on a school district repayment plan approved  
          by the Superintendent.

           EXISTING LAW  :

          1)Requires, under the Leroy F. Greene School Facilities Act of  
            1998, the SAB to allocate to applicant school districts,  
            prescribed per-unhoused-pupil state funding for construction  
            and modernization of school facilities, including hardship  
            funding, and supplemental funding for site development and  
            acquisition.

          2)Prohibits the SAB from apportioning funds to any school  
            district unless the applicant school district has certified to  
            the SAB that it has obtained the written approval of the  
            California Department of Education (CDE) that the site  
            selection, and the building plans and specifications comply  
            with the standard adopted by the CDE.

          3)Specifies that if any certified eligibility or funding  
            application related information is found to have been falsely  
            certified by school districts, architects or design  
            professionals, referred to as a material  inaccuracy, the  
            Office of Public School Construction (OPSC) shall notify the  
            SAB and the SAB shall require repayment of the funds along  
            with interest at the rate paid on moneys in the Pooled Money  
            Investment Account or at the highest rate of interest for the  
            most recent issue of state general obligation bonds within no  
            more than five years.  Requires the SAB to prohibit the school  
            district from self certifying certain project information for  
            any subsequent applications for project funding for up to five  
            years following the date of the finding of material  








                                                                  AB 1476
                                                                  Page  2

            inaccuracy.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :   Unknown

           COMMENTS  :   Background  .  The School Facility Program (SFP) is  
          administered by the SAB, comprised of ten members, and provides  
          state education bond funding to local educational agencies  
          (LEAs) for the construction of new school facilities and  
          modernization or rehabilitation of existing school facilities.   
          The SFP prescribes procedures and eligibility for funding,  
          including a required 50% match for new construction projects and  
          40% match for modernization funding.  Prior to an apportionment,  
          a LEA is required to first obtain approval from the CDE, to  
          ensure that the site selected is safe and conducive to learning  
          (e.g., the school will not be built near high-voltage power  
          transmission lines or high-pressure natural gas lines) and the  
          building specifications support the school's education plan, and  
          the Division of State Architect, to ensure that the  
          architectural design plans meet fire, life and safety  
          requirements; Field Act requirements; and access requirements  
          under the Americans with Disability Act.  The SFP also  
          prescribes specified timelines to ensure progress is made on the  
          proposed project, including timeframes for submission of various  
          forms.

          The SFP utilizes a process whereby the applicant LEA self  
          certifies that it meets certain requirements.  The information  
          certified by the applicant LEA is verified by the OPSC during  
          the closeout audit at the conclusion of the project.  During the  
          closeout audit, if the OPSC discovers that a district's  
          certifications are not consistent with actual actions, it must  
          provide notification to the SAB of potential material  
          inaccuracy.

           Material Inaccuracy  .  SFP regulation defines a material  
          inaccuracy as any falsely certified application that allowed a  
          district an advantage in the funding process.  In other words,  
          due to the certification of the applicant that it had met  
          various requirements and timelines, an apportionment was made  
          and the applicant received funds it was not eligible to receive,  
          or funds were released prematurely.  A LEA applicant need not  
          have committed the false certification intentionally in order to  
          be charged with a material inaccuracy.  Material inaccuracy is a  
          statement of fact.  If funds had been disbursed to the  
          applicant, current law requires the SAB to require repayment  








                                                                  AB 1476
                                                                  Page  3

          within five years, with interest.  There is no financial penalty  
          if no funds had been disbursed.  Since statute does not specify  
          how to calculate the interest penalty, the SAB has discretion to  
          determine the appropriate interest calculation.  The SAB is  
          currently deliberating the adoption of policy on that issue.  

          Since the inception of the SFP in 1998, seven districts have  
          been found to have committed material inaccuracies.  In March,  
          2004, Fresno Unified School District (FUSD) agreed, in a written  
          agreement, to pay the state $3 million in interest penalty for  
          material inaccuracies.  In 2008, the district filed a lawsuit  
          against the SAB charging that the SAB calculated their interest  
          penalty for a longer duration than the interest penalty  
          calculated for districts since March, 2004.  Specifically,  
          FUSD's interest penalty was calculated from the time the  
          district received funds prematurely to the time the SAB took  
          action in March, 2004.  Other districts have been assessed a  
          penalty calculated from the time the district received funds  
          prematurely to the time it met statutory requirements.  It is  
          unclear which of the seven districts have outstanding payments  
          to the state currently.  

           This bill  is sponsored by Val Verde Unified School District  
          (District), located in Riverside county, which was found to have  
          committed material inaccuracy when it failed to disclosed  
          certificates of participation (COP), a form of lease purchasing  
          using property as collateral, when it applied for and received  
          financial hardship funding from the SFP.  Districts are eligible  
          for financial hardship, which provides up to 100% project  
          funding, when they are found to be unable to provide local  
          matching funds.  The SAB, at its September 2007 meeting,  
          directed the District to repay, within five years, $11.8 million  
          for funds it would not have received had the District disclosed  
          the COP funds and $674,560 in interest, calculated from the date  
          of the apportionment through the September 2007 board meeting.   
          The District had filed a lawsuit against the SAB charging that  
          the grant levels for school facilities funding are inadequate  
          and therefore the District was justified in using COPs to make  
          up funding needs.  The courts found the lawsuit unjustified.

          According to the author, the District paid the first payment of  
          $3 million in March 2008.  However, the District has been unable  
          to pay the next scheduled payment of $2.9 million that was due  
          on March 14, 2009.  The District has filed an appeal with the  
          SAB, which has not yet been scheduled for a SAB hearing, but it  








                                                                  AB 1476
                                                                  Page  4

          is unlikely the SAB will be able to provide assistance, as the 5  
          years repayment period is a statutory requirement.  The author  
          states, "The District cannot make the current repayment schedule  
          due to a convergence of fiscal factors that have had a severe  
          impact on the District's budget for the foreseeable future.  The  
          District board recently self-certified a 'negative' 2009-10  
          budget, based upon state budget criteria that require such a  
          certification if a district is unable to meet its budget  
          obligations over a three-year budget cycle."

          According to the District, the District has severe budget  
          problems partially due to a significant and unanticipated  
          decline in enrollment (570 students over the last 18 months) and  
          a sharp drop in developer fees (from several million dollars  
          annually to only $100,000 in the current year) due to the  
          housing crisis.  The District also has $87 million in  
          outstanding COP debt.  State deferrals and budget cuts  
          exacerbated the fiscal conditions.  The District is working  
          closely with the Riverside County Office of Education to develop  
          solutions to keep the district solvent, including severe staff  
          layoffs.  The Riverside County Office of Education concurred  
          with the District's negative budget self certification on April  
          15, 2009.

          Current law requires a county superintendent of schools to  
          determine whether he/she agrees with a district's self  
          certification of "positive, qualified, or negative."  A district  
          has a positive certification when it is anticipated to meet its  
          financial obligations for the current fiscal year and subsequent  
          two fiscal years.  A district has a qualified certification when  
          the school district may not meet its financial obligations for  
          the current fiscal year or two subsequent fiscal years.  A  
          negative certification means that the district is unable to meet  
          its financial obligations for the remainder of the fiscal year  
          or the subsequent fiscal year.

          This bill requires the SAB to extend the repayment period by up  
          to another five years, based on a school district repayment plan  
          approved by the SPI, upon a finding by the SPI that the  
          repayment has caused, or will cause, the school district an  
          extreme financial hardship.  

           Committee amendments  .  The SFP is administered by the SAB and  
          the authority to extend repayments beyond five years should  
          remain with the SAB.  Staff recommends deleting the proposed  








                                                                  AB 1476
                                                                  Page  5

          language in the bill and instead authorize the SAB to extend the  
          repayment period for up to five years under the following  
          conditions:

          1)The county office of education has assigned the district  
            seeking a repayment extension a negative budget certification;  
            and, 

          2)The SAB finds that the district has no available capital  
            facilities funds for repayment.

           Arguments in Support  .  The Riverside County Superintendent of  
          Schools states, "AB 1476 would ensure that the state receives  
          its full repayment with full interest as calculated over the  
          longer time window.  It will give the SAB the latitude to  
          structure such repayments to optimize LEA ability to duly meet  
          their repayment obligations without undue harm to educational  
          programs and local fiscal stability.  Finally, this change  
          addresses the state's overarching interest in protecting the  
          state general fund from the state costs associated with  
          districts that struggle with insolvency, especially in difficult  
          economic times."


           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :   
           

          Support 
           
          Kenn Young, Riverside County Superintendent of Schools

           Opposition 
           
          None on file
           
          Analysis Prepared by  :    Sophia Kwong Kim / ED. / (916) 319-2087