BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 128
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 22, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Julia Brownley, Chair
SB 128 (Lowenthal) - As Amended: March 22, 2011
SENATE VOTE : 27-12
SUBJECT : School facilities funding: high-performance schools
SUMMARY : Expands the authorized uses of state education bond
funds for modernization projects to include the costs associated
with high-performance schools and authorizes a career technical
education (CTE) project to be eligible for a High Performance
Incentive (HPI) grant. Specifically, this bill :
1)Specifies that a modernization apportionment may also be used
for the cost of designs and materials that promote the
efficient use of energy and water, the maximum use of natural
lighting and indoor air quality, the use of recycled materials
and materials that emit a minimum of toxic substances, the use
of acoustics conducive to teaching and learning, and other
characteristics of high-performance schools.
2)Specifies that a project funded by the Career Technical
Education Facilities Program (CTEFP) is also eligible for a
HPI grant.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Requires, under the Leroy F. Greene School Facilities Act of
1998, the State Allocation Board (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. (Education Code
(EC) 17070.35)
2)Specifies that funding may be approved for the modernization
of any permanent school building that is more than 25 years
old, or any portable classroom that is more than 20 years old.
(EC 17073.20)
3)Provides that a modernization apportionment may be used for an
improvement to extend the useful life of, or to enhance the
SB 128
Page 2
physical environment of, the school. The improvement may only
include the cost of design, engineering, testing, inspection,
plan checking, construction management, demolition,
construction, the replacement of portable classrooms,
necessary utility costs, utility connection and other fees,
the purchase and installation of air-conditioning equipment
and insulation materials and related costs, furniture and
equipment, including telecommunication equipment to increase
school security, fire safety improvements, playground safety
improvements, the identification, assessment, or abatement of
hazardous asbestos, seismic safety improvements, and the
upgrading of electrical systems or the wiring or cabling of
classrooms in order to accommodate educational technology.
Specifies that a modernization grant may not be used for costs
associated with acquisition and development of real estate or
for routine maintenance and repair. (EC 17074.25)
4)Requires a 50% local match for education bond funds for the
construction of new schools and a 40% local match for funds
for the modernization of school facilities. (EC 17072.30 and
17074.16)
5)Specifies that a grant for new construction may also be used
for the costs of designs and materials that promote the
efficient use of energy and water, the maximum use of natural
lighting and indoor air quality, the use of recycled materials
and materials that emit a minimum of toxic substances, the use
of acoustics conducive to teaching and learning, and other
characteristics of high performance schools. (EC 17072.35)
6)Establishes the CTEFP to provide funding to eligible local
educational agencies (LEAs) to construct new or reconfigure
existing CTE facilities, and to purchase equipment with an
average useful life expectancy of at least 10 years, to
enhance educational opportunities for pupils in existing high
schools in order to provide them with the skills and knowledge
necessary for high-demand technical careers. (EC 17078.72)
7)Provides that CTEFP grants shall be allocated on a
per-square-foot basis and shall not exceed $3 million per
project per schoolsite for a new construction project and $1.5
million per project per schoolsite for a modernization
project. (EC 17078.72)
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
SB 128
Page 3
Committee, substantial and significant cost pressure on current
or future bond funds.
COMMENTS : SB 50 (L. Greene), Chapter 407, Statutes of 1998,
established the School Facility Program (SFP) which governs the
allocation of state education bond funds and the construction
and modernization of kindergarten through grade 12 school
facilities. In November, 2006, voters approved Proposition 1D,
the Kindergarten-University Public Education Facilities Bond Act
of 2006, which provided $10.416 billion for the construction and
rehabilitation of kindergarten through grade 12 and higher
education school facilities. Among others, Proposition 1D set
aside $3.3 billion for modernization projects, $500 million for
CTEFP projects and for the first time, $100 million for HPI
grants.
High Performance projects : This bill has two components; both
of which are attempts to promote high performance projects,
defined as projects that include the use of designs and
materials that promote energy and water efficiency, maximize the
use of natural lighting, improve indoor air quality, utilize
recycled materials and materials that emit a minimum of toxic
substances, and employ acoustics conducive to teaching and
learning.
Modernization funds : The first provision authorizes
modernization funds to be used for the cost of designs and
materials that promote characteristics of high-performance
schools. Eligibility for modernization funds is based on the
age of buildings (25 years old for permanent building and 20
years old for portable buildings) and pupil enrollment at a
schoolsite. Existing law authorizes modernization funds to be
used for projects to extend the useful life or enhance the
physical environment of a school. Existing law is specific on
eligible costs and prohibits modernization funds to be used for
routine maintenance and repair. According to the Office of
Public School Construction, modernization funds can only be used
for "like for like" projects. In other words, modernization
funds can only be used to replace existing systems. For
example, modernization funds cannot be used to add solar panels
if a roof does not already have solar panels.
This section of law was developed with the enactment of the SFP
in 1998. With the economic, health, environmental, and academic
benefits of constructing and rehabilitating buildings that have
SB 128
Page 4
high performance components, it is time to update the authorized
uses of modernization funds. This bill does not provide
increased modernization funds for this purpose; it simply
authorizes school districts to incorporate such components into
their projects and count the costs as authorized modernization
program expenditures. There is currently $745.3 million
remaining in the modernization program.
CTEFP : As noted previously, Proposition 1D authorized $500
million for CTEFP. The CTEFP promotes the development of CTE
programs through the construction or modernization of CTE
facilities, including the purchase of equipment with an average
useful life expectancy of at least 10 years, at existing
comprehensive high schools.
The CTEFP authorizes a maximum grant of $3 million per project
per schoolsite for new construction projects and $1.5 million
per project per schoolsite for modernization projects. The
CTEFP also requires a school district to contribute from local
resources a dollar amount equal to the amount of the state grant
provided and authorizes the contribution to come from private
industry groups, the school district, or a joint powers
authority. As of May 2011, 428 projects have received CTEFP
funding. Currently, $32.8 million remains in the program.
HPI grant program . Proposition 1D authorized the SAB to develop
regulations to establish HPI grants. The SAB established a
program that models the rating scale used by the Collaborative
for High Performance Schools to identify high performance
schools. CHPS is a nonprofit organization that promotes the
design of high performance schools, focusing on elements that
will provide learning environments that are energy efficient,
healthy, comfortable, and well lit. CHPS certifies buildings
considered high performance. Modeling the CHPS model for
certifying high performance schools, under the HPI grant
program, a district must meet specified prerequisites and earn
points in the areas of sustainable sites, water, energy,
materials and indoor environmental quality that result in an
increase in the base SFP grant of between two to just over 11
percent. In May 2010, the SAB, the ten-member board responsible
for overseeing state education bond funds, concerned about the
low level of interest in the program, adopted regulations that
resulted in higher levels of grant funds, including a base grant
of $150,000 for new construction projects and $250,000 for
modernization projects. As of March 2011, 145 projects have
SB 128
Page 5
been awarded HPI grants for new construction, modernization,
critically overcrowded schools, charter schools and overcrowding
relief programs; the majority are new construction projects.
Currently, $73.2 million remains in the HPI grant program.
This bill authorizes a CTEFP-funded project to also apply for
HPI grants. CTEFP projects range from being one or several
rooms in an existing school building to stand alone buildings.
It is unclear whether CTEFP projects will be able to garner the
required prerequisites and minimum points to be eligible for a
HPI grant. Since CTEFP projects are smaller scaled projects,
should these projects receive the same base HPI grant ($150,000
for new construction and $250,000 for modernization) as a new
schoolsite with multiple buildings? CTEFP projects receive a
maximum of $3 million for new construction and $1.5 million for
modernization. It is unclear whether the percentage increase
achieved through the high performance features will be
sufficient or insufficient when applied to lower cost projects.
Should an alternate HPI funding model be devised for CTEFP
projects? These are issues the SAB can consider through
regulations if this bill is passed by the Legislature and signed
into law.
The author states, "The current program may be unintentionally
creating an inequity between new school facilities and existing
school facilities. Current law does not allow new high
performance systems to be funded under the Modernization
program. All students, whether in new, old or career technical
education classrooms should have the opportunity to receive
instruction in facilities that meet environmental and health
standards on par with those newly built facilities."
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
California Federation of Teachers
California School Boards Association
California State PTA
Coalition for Adequate School Housing
Collaborative for High Performance Schools
Community Action to Fight Asthma
County School Facilities Consortium
Green Collar Jobs Campaign of the Ella Baker Center for Human
SB 128
Page 6
Rights
National Resources Defense Council
Oakland Unified School District
San Francisco Unified School District
United States Green Building Council California Advocacy
Committee
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by : Sophia Kwong Kim / ED. / (916) 319-2087