BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  SB 305
                                                                  Page  1


          SENATE THIRD READING
          SB 305 (Corbett)
          As Amended  May 6, 2009
          Majority vote 

           SENATE VOTE  :22-10  
           
           EDUCATION           8-0         APPROPRIATIONS      11-5        
           
           ------------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |Ayes:|Brownley, Arambula,       |Ayes:|De Leon, Ammiano, Charles  |
          |     |Buchanan, Carter, Eng,    |     |Calderon, Coto, Davis,     |
          |     |Garrick, Solorio,         |     |Fuentes, Hall,             |
          |     |Torlakson                 |     |John A. Perez, Skinner,    |
          |     |                          |     |Solorio, Torlakson         |
          |     |                          |     |                           |
          |-----+--------------------------+-----+---------------------------|
          |     |                          |Nays:|Nielsen, Duvall, Harkey,   |
          |     |                          |     |Miller,                    |
          |     |                          |     |Audra Strickland           |
          |     |                          |     |                           |
           ------------------------------------------------------------------ 
           SUMMARY  :  Requires the Office of the State Architect, using  
          existing resources, to update the inventory and report on the  
          seismic safety of California public schools to more accurately  
          identify building deficiencies in school facilities.  Requires  
          the State Allocation Board (SAB) to use the information from  
          this updated inventory and report to inform the development of  
          eligibility criteria for the Seismic Mitigation Program.  

           EXISTING LAW  :

          1)Requires the Department of General Services (DGS) to, in  
            consultation with the Seismic Safety Commission, conduct an  
            inventory of public school buildings that are concrete tilt-up  
            school buildings and school buildings with nonwood frame walls  
            that do not meet the minimum requirements of the 1976 Uniform  
            Building Code.  Provides that priority shall be given to  
            school buildings that are in the highest seismic risk zones in  
            accordance with the seismic hazard maps of the Department of  
            Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology.

          2)Requires public school buildings to meet pupil safety  
            performance standards pursuant to the Field Act.








                                                                  SB 305
                                                                  Page  2



          3)Authorizes school districts to apply for state education bond  
            funds for extraordinary circumstances, which may include the  
            need to repair, reconstruct, or replace the most vulnerable  
            school facilities that are identified as a Category 2  
            building, determined by the DGS to pose an unacceptable risk  
            of injury to its occupants in the event of a seismic event.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee, minor, absorbable costs to the DGS to complete the  
          requirements of this measure.

           COMMENTS  :  The Field Act, named after the author of the bill  
          establishing the Act, Assemblymember C. Don Field, was enacted  
          in 1933 after an earthquake in Long Beach.  The Act authorized  
          the State Architect to develop a statewide building code to make  
          all buildings, especially school buildings, safe from  
          earthquakes.  The Act has been strengthened since then and  
          California's public schools are commonly considered to be the  
          safest public buildings in the state. 
          On November 15, 2002, the DGS released a report titled "Seismic  
          Safety Inventory of California Public Schools," pursuant to AB  
          300 (Corbett), Chapter 622, Statutes of 1999.  Then  
          Assemblymember Corbett argued that an inventory was needed  
          because some systems allowed during the early days of the Field  
          Act did not behave as anticipated and as result, there are  
          school buildings that are at risk of full or partial collapse  
          due to design philosophies, methods of construction, unapproved  
          alterations, deficient structural system, or deterioration to  
          primary structural systems over the years.    
          
          Based on the criteria specified in the bill, the DGS' Division  
          of the State Architect (DSA) evaluated construction documents of  
          nonwood frame public school buildings built before July 1, 1978.  
           These are buildings designed and constructed prior to the  
          incorporation of seismic design of buildings within the 1976  
          Uniform Building Code adopted on July 1, 1978 following an  
          earthquake in the San Fernando Valley in 1971.  The DSA found  
          that "80 percent of California's kindergarten through 12th grade  
          public school buildings meet life safety performance standards  
          and would protect children from injury during a serious  
          earthquake."  However, the report found that 7,537 school  
          buildings, deemed Category 2 buildings, representing 14% of the  
          state's kindergarten through 12th grade school building's square  








                                                                  SB 305
                                                                  Page  3


          footage at the time of the report, may not perform well during  
          an earthquake and should undergo additional seismic evaluation.   
          The report estimated a cost of $4.7 billion for repairs.  This  
          inventory is commonly referred to as the "AB 300 list".  The  
          report also identified 2,100 school buildings that are expected,  
          but not guaranteed, to achieve life-safety performance in future  
          earthquakes.

          In part due to the AB 300 report, Proposition 1D, the  
          Kindergarten-University Public Education Facilities Bond Act of  
          2006, passed by voters in November, 2006, authorizes up to  
          $199.5 million for the repair, reconstruction, or replacement of  
          the most vulnerable school facilities or Category 2 buildings.   
          With limited funds, the SAB, a 10-member body that administers  
          state bond funds, adopted regulations in September 2007 that  
          specify the following four eligibility criteria for funding:

          1)The facility is constructed of one of four Category 2  
            construction types (Concrete Moment Frame; Precast/Tilt-up  
            Concrete Shear Wall with Flexible Roof, Precast Concrete Frame  
            and Roofs with Concrete Shear Walls, or Unreinforced Masonry  
            Bearing Wall buildings).

          2)The facility is located in a zone where the ground shaking  
            intensity (GSI) is 1.70g or more.

          3)The facility is designed for student and staff occupancy. 

          4)A structural engineer's report has been conducted identifying  
            the facility's deficiencies.

          Based on these criteria, the DSA initially estimated that 77  
          facilities were eligible for funding.  Through contacts with  
          districts and extensive outreach, the DSA has determined that 52  
          of the 77 facilities have already been rehabilitated, replaced,  
          demolish, or are no longer used for students and staff, leaving  
          25 eligible facilities.  Thus far, four districts have submitted  
          architectural plans to the DSA for review and one application,  
          from the San Ramon Valley Unified School District, has been  
          approved for funding by the SAB and only recently at its June  
          24, 2009 meeting.  Districts have reported that the eligibility  
          criteria are too stringent and therefore only a handful intends  
          to apply for mitigation funds.  The SAB, working in conjunction  
          with the DSA, is currently in the process of revising the  








                                                                  SB 305
                                                                  Page  4


          regulations.  Several options to expand eligibility have been  
          proposed by the Office of Public School Construction for  
          consideration by the SAB, including lowering the GSI threshold  
          and expanding the number of building construction types.  

          This bill requires the DGS to update the AB 300 inventory and  
          report and requires the SAB to use the information to inform the  
          development of eligibility criteria for seismic mitigation  
          funding.  The DSA and the SAB are in the process of doing what  
          this bill requires.  The original AB 300 investigation cost  
          $500,000 and was a paper review.  To garner more precise  
          information, almost a year ago, DSA initiated contact with  
          school districts with facilities on the AB 300 list and asked  
          districts to provide information on the structural systems  
          (e.g., whether the facility is constructed with steel, concrete  
          masonry, etc.) of the facilities.  DSA anticipates having an  
          updated report by next year.  

          The author states, "There has been growing concern in the state  
          that a number of our public schools are seismically unsafe.   
          Additionally, until 2001, there were no methods in place to  
          determine which schools were unsafe and where they were  
          located?.Unfortunately, the criteria established in regulation  
          [for seismic mitigation funds] has made it virtually impossible  
          for bond funding to be allocated to the schools for seismic  
          safety construction?.As the state revisits this matter it is  
          important that the data on schools in [sic] up to date."


           Analysis Prepared by  :    Sophia Kwong Kim / ED. / (916) 319-2087  



                                                                FN: 0001956