BILL ANALYSIS �
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
SB 64 (Liu)
Hearing Date: 05/26/2011 Amended: 04/26/2011
Consultant: Mark McKenzie Policy Vote: ED. 8-0
_________________________________________________________________
____
BILL SUMMARY: SB 64 would revise the mandate test claim process
for school districts, as specified, and establish a seven-member
school district test claim advisory committee to provide the
Commission on State Mandates with recommendations on school
district test claims and incorrect reduction claims. The bill
would also shift numerous duties of school district test
claimants to the advisory committee, require the advisory
committee to prepare proposed parameters and guidelines on
behalf of school district claimants, require the advisory
committee to review and propose revisions to existing parameters
and guidelines every three years, and require the advisory
committee to act on behalf of school district claimants in the
alternative process of establishing reasonable reimbursement
methodologies.
_________________________________________________________________
____
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 Fund
Advisory Committee: DOF$75 $150 $150 General
Advisory Committee: CDEas least $75 at least $150at
least $150 General
Advisory Committee: SCO$70 $140 $140 General
CSM staff support $114 $228 $228 General
Potential mandate Unknown, potentially reimbursable
costsGeneral
related to LEA participation on advisory
committee (see staff comments)
_________________________________________________________________
____
STAFF COMMENTS: SUSPENSE FILE.
Existing law, Article XIII B, Section 6 of the California
Constitution, requires the state to reimburse local governments
and school districts for the cost of new programs or higher
SB 64 (Liu)
Page 1
levels of service mandated by the Legislature or any state
agency (Proposition 4, 1979). In 1984, the Legislature created
the Commission on State Mandates (CSM), as a quasi-judicial
body, to decide test claims filed by local agencies and school
districts seeking reimbursement for a state-mandated local
program. If the CSM identifies a state-mandated program as
eligible for reimbursement, it adopts parameters and guidelines
defining what activities will be reimbursed and adopts statewide
cost estimates. The CSM is also authorized to hear incorrect
reductions claims from local agencies and school districts if
the State Controller (SCO) reduces reimbursement claims upon
audit and the claimant chooses to dispute that reduction.
Proposition 1A, approved by the voters in 2008, requires the
Legislature to appropriate funds in the annual budget to pay
outstanding mandate claims, or to suspend or repeal the mandate.
However, these provisions apply to local governments only and -
by definition - do not include school districts or community
colleges.
The CSM consists of the State Treasurer, the SCO, the Director
of Department of Finance (DOF), the Director of the Office of
Planning and Research, two local elected officials (with the
restriction that they come from different categories of local
government, including school district governing boards, city
councils, or county boards of supervisors), and a public member
with experience in public finance. No current member of the CSM
is an elected member of a local education agency (LEA) board.
SB 64 would establish a seven-member school district test claim
advisory committee, comprised of officials from the DOF, the
SCO, and the Department of Education (CDE), and four
representatives of school agencies, including, but not limited
to, chief business officials, board members, and
superintendents. The advisory committee members would be
selected by, and serve at the pleasure of the CSM, and technical
expertise and other support for the advisory committee would be
provided by the CSM.
The DOF, SCO, and CDE would all dedicate one full time position
for the work of the advisory committee. Estimated costs for DOF
staff are approximately $150,000 annually, the SCO estimates
costs of $140,000, and CDE indicates costs could be a minimum of
$150,000. Staff notes that it is unclear whether the
participation of four LEA officials on the advisory committee
could be considered a state-mandate. If the mandated duties of
SB 64 (Liu)
Page 2
these officials were determined to be reimbursable
state-mandate, costs could be in the range of $500,000 to
$700,000 annually.
The CSM indicates that staff support costs associated with the
advisory committee would be $228,393 annually for two additional
positions (one staff counsel, and one associate governmental
program analyst). Much of the work of the advisory committee is
a result of the bill shifting responsibility from school
district test claimants to the committee. It is likely that CSM
staff would prepare much of the documentation required for the
filing of school district test claims as part of the duties
associated with the new advisory committee. In addition, the
advisory committee would prepare proposed parameters and
guidelines, and work with DOF to prepare reasonable
reimbursement methodologies on behalf of test claimants. CSM
staff would also be heavily involved in the review of existing
parameters and guidelines every three years. There are
currently 50 sets of parameters and guidelines that would need
review, an additional three sets pending before the CSM, and 29
pending school district test claims that could result in future
parameters and guidelines.
The activities of the advisory committee would also be subject
to the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting statutes, so any work done by
the committee would be conducted in public. The CSM indicates
costs are unknown at this time, but would include the following
activities: public meetings, including notice, hearing and
recording costs, and any travel costs for out-of-town advisory
committee members.
Staff notes that there appear to be some inherent conflicts of
interest in the bill. While the committee is an advisory body
to the CSM, it also acts on behalf of LEAs in many of its
functions. The Committee may wish to consider whether it is
appropriate for the advisory committee to make recommendations
to the CSM on incorrect reduction claims, when the majority of
the advisory committee are peers to one party of the claim, and
the SCO, as a member of the advisory committee, represents the
other party.
SB 64 (Liu)
Page 3