BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  AB 1927
                                                                  Page  1


          ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
          AB 1927 (Frazier)
          As Amended  May 5, 2014
          Majority vote 

           HIGHER EDUCATION    9-4         BANKING & FINANCE   7-3         
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|Williams, Bloom, Fong,    |Ayes:|Dickinson, Bonta, Chau,   |
          |     |Fox,                      |     |Gatto, Perea, Weber,      |
          |     |Jones-Sawyer, Levine,     |     |Williams                  |
          |     |Medina,                   |     |                          |
          |     |Quirk-Silva, Weber        |     |                          |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
          |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
          |Nays:|Ch�vez, Linder, Olsen,    |Nays:|Allen, Achadjian, Linder  |
          |     |Wilk                      |     |                          |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           APPROPRIATIONS      12-5                                        
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|Gatto, Bocanegra,         |     |                          |
          |     |Bradford,                 |     |                          |
          |     |Ian Calderon, Campos,     |     |                          |
          |     |Eggman, Gomez, Holden,    |     |                          |
          |     |Pan, Quirk,               |     |                          |
          |     |Ridley-Thomas, Weber      |     |                          |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
          |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
          |Nays:|Bigelow, Donnelly, Jones, |     |                          |
          |     |Linder, Wagner            |     |                          |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           SUMMARY  :  Requires the Board of Trustees (BOT) of the California  
          State University (CSU) and the Board of Governors (BOG) of the  
          California Community Colleges (CCC) and requests the Regents of  
          the University of California (UC) and the governing bodies of  
          accredited private non-profit and for-profit postsecondary  
          educational institutions, to adopt policies to be used for  
          negotiating contracts between their institutions and financial  
          institutions for disbursing students' financial aid awards and  
          other refunds onto a debit card, prepaid card or preloaded card  
          in a manner that best serves students' needs.  Specifically,  








                                                                  AB 1927
                                                                  Page  2


           this bill  requires the policies to be consistent with federal  
          law and regulations and to do all of the following:

             1)   Prohibit revenue sharing between the postsecondary  
               institution and the financial institution.

             2)   Prohibit the sale or sharing of personal information.

             3)   Prohibit the imposition of a point-of-sale transaction  
               fee on use of the card.

             4)   Provide a clear disclosure of all fees associated with  
               the card.

             5)   Provide, for a cobranded card, a clear disclosure that  
               the card is not endorsed by the educational institution.

             6)   Ensure the student does not incur any cost in opening an  
               account or initially receiving the card.

             7)   Ensure the student has convenient access to a branch  
               office or automatic teller machine (ATM) of the bank.

             8)   Ensure the card can be widely used.

             9)   Prohibit marketing a debit card as a credit card.

             10)  Disclose to students the benefits and responsibilities  
               of all options of financial aid disbursement available.

           EXISTING LAW  :

          1)Establishes rules (via federal regulations) for the  
            disbursement of federal financial aid to students.  Said rules  
            authorize a school to establish a policy requiring its  
            students to provide bank account information, or open an  
            account at a bank of their choosing as long as this policy  
            does not delay the disbursement of federal student aid funds  
            to students.  Should a school open a bank account on behalf of  
            the student, the rules require that schools comply with  
            conditions related to consent, notice, disclosure and costs to  
            open or transact on the account and additionally require that  
            the school ensure that the student has convenient access to a  
            branch office or ATMs of the bank so that the student does not  








                                                                  AB 1927
                                                                  Page  3


            incur any cost in making cash withdrawals.  Additionally, the  
            regulations require that the branch office or ATMs be located  
            on the institution's campus, in institutionally-owned or  
            operated facilities, or immediately adjacent to and accessible  
            from the campus.  These rules also include conditions that  
            must be met if a school uses a store value card or prepaid  
            debit card (34 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Section  
            668.164(c)(3)).

          2)Allows schools to contract with servicers for the  
            administration of any aspect of the school's participation in  
            Title IV programs and specifies that a school may accept the  
            standard contract terms and conditions in a servicer's  
            proposal for delivering credit balances or negotiate the terms  
            and conditions to meet the specific needs of the school or its  
            students (34 CFR Section 668.25).

          3)Defines the term "debit card" as an accepted card or other  
            means of access to a debit cardholder's account that may be  
            used to initiate electronic funds transfers and may be used  
            without unique identifying information such as a personal  
            identification number to initiate access to the debit  
            cardholder's account; and, limits a debit cardholder's  
            liability for unauthorized use of a debit card (Civil Code  
            Sections 1748.30 and 1748.31).

          4)Provides for a variety of student financial aid programs  
            including the Cal Grant programs and the CCC BOGs fee waiver  
            program.  Current law requires that eligibility for a Cal  
            Grant and the determination of financial need be accomplished  
            using the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA),  
            and that this application be used for all programs funded by  
            the state or a public institution of postsecondary education  
            as well as all federal programs administered by a  
            postsecondary educational institution.  Current law makes an  
            exception to this requirement for the BOG fee waiver program  
            which is authorized to use a simplified application designed  
            for that sole purpose (Education Code Sections 69432.9 and  
            69433).

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee, costs for the governing boards of the CSU and the CCC  
          to adopt the required policies would be minor and absorbable.   
          The UC would have no costs, as its campuses do not have such  








                                                                  AB 1927
                                                                  Page  4


          contracts for financial aid disbursement.
           
           COMMENTS  :  Background.  When students receive financial aid,  
          whether it is in the form of a scholarship, grant, or student  
          loan, schools apply that money to college costs then disburse  
          the rest to the student.  Instead of disbursing remaining aid  
          funds by check, many campuses are funding financial aid awards  
          through special debit cards that sometimes double as student  
          identification cards. 

          Recent reports and media attention have raised concerns about  
          whether the terms and conditions of the debit cards that  
          servicers use to deliver financial aid credit balances to  
          students are in the best interest of students.  The United  
          States (U.S.) Department of Education (USDE) Office of Inspector  
          General March 2014 report entitled, "Third-Party Servicer Use of  
          Debit Cards to Deliver Title IV Funds," reveals their findings  
          regarding the use of debit cards to deliver Title IV funds to  
          students.  The Inspector General determined that the USDE needs  
          to take action to better ensure that the interests of students  
          are being served when schools use servicers to deliver credit  
          balances.  The Inspector General's report comes as the USDE is  
          considering new debit card rules as part of a wide-ranging rule  
          making session on federal student aid.

          Need for the bill.  According to the author, as college budgets  
          have shrunk, colleges have partnered with financial firms to  
          disburse student financial aid - oftentimes in the form of debit  
          and prepaid cards.  While these partnerships can lower  
          administrative costs for colleges and have the potential to be  
          beneficial to students, their value has been called into  
          question in instances where students end up bearing the cost  
          directly through poor customer service and unnecessarily high  
          fees that eat into their already limited financial aid.  The  
          author states, "Existing federal law requires minimal  
          protections for students and does not address issues that have  
          been particularly problematic.  Colleges and universities must  
          set in place regulations for campus debit card programs to  
          ensure that students are protected in these arrangements."

          According to a May 2012 U.S. Public Interest Research Group  
          (PIRG) Educational Fund report entitled, "The Campus Debit Card  
          Trap:  Are Bank Partnerships Fair to Students?" - issuing debit  
          cards for disbursing funds may be good for colleges, but the  








                                                                  AB 1927
                                                                  Page  5


          study argues that cash-strapped students absorb the costs.  The  
          PIRG study finds that some debit cards come with transaction  
          fees as high as $0.50 per swipe, $38 per overdraft and $10 for  
          inactivity after six months without use.  The PIRG study also  
          finds that students do not fully realize what they are signing  
          up for when they elect to receive their financial aid award via  
          debit card.  Additionally, the PIRG study finds that debit card  
          contracts have been controversial at some postsecondary  
          campuses; and that it is hard to obtain contracts between the  
          postsecondary institutions and the banks and other financial  
          institutions when seeking to disburse students' financial aid  
          awards via debit cards.  

          Related legislation.  SB 845 (Correa) of the current legislative  
          session, which is pending action in the Senate Appropriations  
          Committee, would require the CCC BOG and the CSU BOT, and would  
          request the UC Regents and each governing body of an accredited  
          private postsecondary educational institution, to develop, in  
          consultation with stakeholders, one or more model contracts for  
          use at their respective systems for the disbursement of a  
          financial aid award, scholarship, campus-based aid award, or  
          school refund on a debit, prepaid, or preloaded card.


           Analysis Prepared by  :    Jeanice Warden / HIGHER ED. / (916)  
          319-3960 


                                                                FN: 0003447