BILL ANALYSIS
SB 307
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 27, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Kevin De Leon, Chair
SB 307 (Alquist) - As Amended: August 24, 2009
Policy Committee: Education Vote:9-0
Urgency: Yes State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill requires, for the 2009-10 fiscal year (FY) to the
2012-13 FY, a regional occupational center program (ROC/P),
maintained by a joint powers authority (JPA), to receive its
operating funds directly from the county office of education
(COE) of the county in which it is located, as specified.
Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires the ROC/P JPA to receive its operating funding in a
manner consistent with the funding for school districts that
comprise the JPA, which is provided to the COE pursuant to the
annual budget act.
2)Authorizes a ROC/P JPA that receives funding under this
measure to provide funding to the school district (pursuant to
its JPA agreement).
3)Specifies that this measure does not prohibit any school
district or COE from utilizing ROC/P funding allocated in the
annual budget act for any educational purpose, as specified in
SB 4 X3 (Ducheny), Chapter 12, Statutes of 2009 (the budget
flexibility language enacted in February 2009).
FISCAL EFFECT
Potential GF/98 cost pressure, likely between $200,000 and
$280,000, if a school district does not receive their funding
from the ROC/JPA (see comment #3 below). There are 26 ROC/P
JPAs in the state.
As part of the February 2009 budget package, SB 4 X3 (Ducheny),
Chapter 12, Statutes of 2009, provided local education agencies
(LEAs) with policy and fiscal flexibility for all ROC/P programs
funded in the budget act, including those operated by JPAs.
SB 307
Page 2
This bill is contrary to these provisions because school
districts participating in the ROC/P JPA will not have direct
access to ROC/P funding in order to use in a flexibility manner.
COMMENTS
1)Background . ROC/Ps provide high school students 16 years of
age and older, and also adult students, with valuable career
and technical education (CTE) so students can: (a) enter the
workforce with skills and competencies to be successful; (b)
pursue advanced training in higher educational institutions;
and/or (c) upgrade existing skills and knowledge. There are 74
ROC/Ps in the state serving approximately 470,000 students in
secondary schools. Of this number, 26 are operated by a JPA.
ROC/Ps fall under one of three distinct organizational
structures: (a) school districts participating in a
COE-operated ROC/P; (b) school districts participating under a
JPA; or (c) a single school district. This bill attempts to
rectify funding issues related to ROC/P maintained by a JPA.
SB 4 X3 (part of the February budget process), provided LEAs
with unprecedented fiscal and policy flexibility related to
over 40 categorical programs between the 2008-09 FY to the
2012-13 FY. Specifically, any LEA that received funding for
specified categorical programs, including ROC/Ps, in the
2008-09 FY is authorized to use this funding for any other
educational purpose until the 2012-13 FY. The LEA may choose
to continue operating the categorical program that it received
funding for or redirect it for any other educational purpose
it deems appropriate.
This bill, sponsored by the Metropolitan Education District,
requires a ROC/P JPA to receive its funding directly from
COEs, not school districts. The author argues this bill is
technical clean-up to ensure that ROC/P JPA continue receiving
their funding.
2)SB 1197 (Alquist), Chapter 519, Statutes of 2008 , requires,
commencing with the 2009-10 FY, ROC/P JPAs to receive funding
directly from COE in which it is located, instead of receiving
funds from each of the school districts participating in the
JPA.
Prior to the enactment of Chapter 519, ROC/P JPAs received
SB 307
Page 3
their funding from school districts participating in the JPA.
The funding is based on their average daily attendance (ADA)
(i.e., unit that generates the amount of revenue limit
funding).
As referenced above, SB 4 X3 (enacted in February 2009)
established policy and fiscal flexibility for all ROC/P
programs funded in the budget act, including those operated by
JPAs. Presumably, the statutory flexibility allows school
districts who receive ROC/P funding to do one of two things:
(a) continue operating their programs or (b) redirect a
portion or all funding for another education purpose during
the time period established in statute.
This bill requires, for the 2009-10 FY to the 2012-13 FY, a
ROC/P JPA to receive its operating funds directly from the COE
of the county in which it is located as set forth in SB 1197.
As such, it is unclear if school districts participating in
the JPA have access to their funding that is allocated for the
ROC/P JPA and therefore, have the ability to utilize these
funds in a flexible manner as established in SB 4 X3.
3)What happens to funding, if school districts participating in
a ROC/P JPA program chooses not to participate ? This bill
specifies that nothing prohibits any school district or COE
from utilizing ROC/P funding allocated in the annual budget
act for any educational purpose, as specified in SB 4 X3.
However, it is unclear as to how the school district would
access this funding for potential flexibility purposes if it
decides not to participate in the ROCP/JPA.
For example, under this bill, a COE allocates funding directly
to the ROC/P JPA. If a school district chooses not to
participate in the program, it is unclear (under local JPA
agreements) if any or all of their funding would be returned
to it. Therefore, school districts may be paying the ROC/P
JPA and not having students served. If a school district does
not receive their funding from the ROC/JPA, it is conceivable
for a district to request a backfill from the COE or the
state.
The committee may wish to consider whether or not this bill
should address issues related to a school district's desire to
terminate the JPA agreement.
Analysis Prepared by : Kimberly Rodriguez / APPR. / (916)
319-2081
SB 307
Page 4