BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                       



           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                  AB 2297|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                         |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                         |
          |(916) 651-1520         Fax: (916) |                         |
          |327-4478                          |                         |
           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
           
                                         
                                 THIRD READING


          Bill No:  AB 2297
          Author:   Brownley (D)
          Amended:  7/1/10 in Senate
          Vote:     21

           
           SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE  :  7-0, 6/23/10
          AYES:  Romero, Huff, Alquist, Emmerson, Liu, Price,  
            Simitian
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Hancock, Wyland

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE  :  Senate Rule 28.8

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  68-8, 5/3/10 - See last page for vote


           SUBJECT  :    Community colleges:  nonresident fees

           SOURCE  :     Author


           DIGEST  :    This bill extends the options available to a  
          local community college governing board for setting  
          nonresident tuition fees.

           ANALYSIS  :    Current law authorizes a community college  
          district to admit nonresident students and requires that  
          these students be charged a tuition fee, with certain  
          specified exemptions.  Current law requires that the  
          tuition fee be set by the governing board of each community  
          college district by February 1 of each year for the  
          succeeding fiscal year that specified notice of these fee  
          changes be provided, and that any increase in these fees be  
                                                           CONTINUED





                                                               AB 2297
                                                                Page  
          2

          gradual, moderate, and predictable.

          Current law prescribes a formula for the calculation of the  
          nonresident fee which, generally, is based upon the amount  
          expended by the district for the "expense of education",  
          adjusted by the Consumer Price Index, and divided by the  
          total full-time equivalent students (including nonresident  
          students) that attend the district in the preceding fiscal  
          year.  Current law also authorizes a tuition fee amount not  
          to exceed that established by any contiguous district, and  
          prohibits the fee from being less than the statewide  
          average fee for students.  Special provision is made for  
          the calculation of the fee by districts that have greater  
          than 10 percent full-time equivalent students from  
          non-credit courses.

          This bill:

          1.Expands the options available to a local community  
            college governing board for setting nonresident tuition  
            fees.  More specifically it authorizes a district to:

             A.    Set the nonresident tuition fee at the greater of  
                the fee for the current year or any of the past four  
                years if the statewide average fee, calculated as  
                specified, for the succeeding fiscal year is less  
                than the current fiscal year or any of the prior four  
                fiscal years.

             B.    Set the nonresident tuition fee in an amount equal  
                to or less than the average of the nonresident  
                tuition fees of public community colleges of no less  
                than 12 states comparable to California in cost of  
                living, to be determined as specified.

          2.Requires the additional revenue generated by the  
            increased nonresident tuition permitted under the changes  
            in existing law made by this bill to be used to expand  
            and enhance services to resident students.

          3.Prohibits the admission of nonresident students from  
            coming at the expense of resident enrollment.

          4.Requires the Chancellor's Office of the California  

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                               AB 2297
                                                                Page  
          3

            Community Colleges to make specified data relating to  
            nonresident tuition available to the Legislative  
            Analyst's Office, and requires the LAO to include a  
            summary of this data in its annual analysis of the  
            Governor's budget proposal.

          5.Makes a number of conforming changes.

           Comments

          Other Public Segments  .  Education Code Sections 68050-68052  
          authorizes both the University of California (UC) and the  
          California State University (CSU) to establish nonresident  
          student tuition policies and methodologies to be developed  
          by each institution's governing body.  The annual fee rate  
          is prohibited from falling below the marginal cost of  
          instruction and the rates of comparison institutions, as  
          identified by the California Postsecondary Education  
          Commission, must be considered.  In addition, school  
          districts are authorized to admit students from adjoining  
          states and the district is required to collect nonresident  
          tuition sufficient to reimburse the district for the total  
          cost of educating the pupil.
           
          Preserving California Residents' Access  .  According to the  
          Community College Chancellor's Office of the California  
          Community Colleges, although current law does establish  
          priority enrollment for members and former members of the  
          Armed Forces, and establishes lower priority for special  
          part-time or full-time students, there is no specific  
          statutory provision that requires that resident students be  
          given priority for admission on a statewide basis.  

           Disturbing Unchecked Trend  ?  The UC Commission on the  
          Future recently issued its first round of recommendations  
          for developing a new vision for UC.  These recommendations  
          are currently being disseminated for review and feedback  
          for the Academic Senate, staff, students and the public  
          prior to formal recommendation to the Regents in July.   
          Among the recommendations around funding strategies is a  
          proposal to increase the enrollment of nonresident  
          undergraduates with the possibility of adding 7,600  
          nonresident students as replacements for existing resident  
          students enrolled above the 2007-08 enrollment targets (the  

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                               AB 2297
                                                                Page  
          4

          rationale being that the state provides no funds for these  
          "over-enrolled" students).

          Similarly, the CSU Board of Trustees will hold a special  
          meeting on June 18 to consider a proposal for potential fee  
          increases.  Among other things, the proposal would  
          eliminate the cap on nonresident tuition, with nonresident  
          students paying $16,257 for 30 semester units rather than  
          the current $11,160.

          Understandably, the pressures of the state's budget  
          situation are compelling the public postsecondary education  
          segments to consider sources of revenue outside the general  
          fund in order to meet their needs/priorities.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  Yes    
          Local:  No

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  8/3/10)

          California Community College League
          Santa Monica College

           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :    According to the author's office,  
          current law provides a number of unintended benefits to  
          nonresidents attending California Community Colleges.   
          Because the formulaic statutory calculation for setting  
          nonresident tuition fees relies on the amount actually  
          expended by the community colleges, recent budget cuts have  
          resulted in nonresidents paying a lower amount than in  
          prior years, the first time reductions have occurred in the  
          last ten years (the state average nonresident tuition fee  
          has reportedly gone from $190 per unit in 2009-10 to  
          potentially $175 per unit in 2011-12.  Additionally, there  
          is no mechanism for adjusting the level of benefit that  
          California taxpayers provide to nonresidents that allows  
          for parity with the level of benefit provided by comparable  
          states to California residents (the average nonresident fee  
          is reportedly $280 per unit in states with comparable costs  
          of living).  According to the author's office, this bill  
          could result in additional funds which could minimize the  
          effect of budget cuts to the community colleges,  
          ostensibly, providing relief for, and benefiting,  
          California taxpayers and residents.

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                               AB 2297
                                                                Page  
          5



           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  : 
          AYES:  Adams, Ammiano, Arambula, Bass, Beall, Bill  
            Berryhill, Tom Berryhill, Blakeslee, Block, Blumenfield,  
            Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan, Caballero, Charles  
            Calderon, Carter, Chesbro, Conway, Cook, Coto, Davis, De  
            La Torre, De Leon, Emmerson, Eng, Evans, Feuer, Fletcher,  
            Fong, Fuentes, Fuller, Galgiani, Garrick, Gilmore,  
            Hagman, Harkey, Hayashi, Hernandez, Hill, Huber, Huffman,  
            Jeffries, Jones, Lieu, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza,  
            Monning, Nava, Nestande, Niello, Nielsen, Norby, V.  
            Manuel Perez, Portantino, Ruskin, Salas, Saldana,  
            Skinner, Smyth, Solorio, Audra Strickland, Swanson,  
            Torlakson, Torres, Torrico, Tran, Yamada
          NOES:  Anderson, DeVore, Gaines, Knight, Logue, Miller,  
            Silva, Villines
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Furutani, Hall, John A. Perez, Vacancy


          CPM:cm  8/3/10   Senate Floor Analyses 

                         SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                ****  END  ****




















                                                           CONTINUED