BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 344|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
VETO
Bill No: SB 344
Author: Padilla (D)
Amended: 9/12/13
Vote: 21
PRIOR SENATE VOTES NOT RELEVANT
SENATE FLOOR : 38-0, 9/12/13
AYES: Anderson, Berryhill, Block, Calderon, Cannella, Corbett,
Correa, De Le�n, DeSaulnier, Emmerson, Evans, Fuller, Gaines,
Galgiani, Hancock, Hernandez, Hill, Hueso, Huff, Jackson,
Knight, Lara, Leno, Lieu, Liu, Monning, Nielsen, Padilla,
Pavley, Roth, Steinberg, Torres, Vidak, Walters, Wolk, Wright,
Wyland, Yee
NO VOTE RECORDED: Beall, Vacancy
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 67-3, 9/12/13 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Schools
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill establishes new requirements related to the
Local Control Accountability Plans (LCAPs) that local education
agencies (LEAs) are required to adopt beginning July 1, 2014.
ANALYSIS :
Existing law:
CONTINUED
SB 344
Page
2
1.Requires each LEA to adopt an LCAP by July 1, 2014, based on a
template to be adopted by the State Board of Education (SBE)
by March 31, 2014.
2.Requires LEAs to update their LCAPs annually and renew them
every three years.
3.Requires each LCAP to identify annual goals and the specific
actions the LEA will take to achieve those goals for all
pupils and each of the following pupils subgroups:
Ethnic subgroups;
Socioeconomically disadvantaged pupils;
English learners (ELs);
Pupils with disabilities; and
Foster youth.
1.Requires LEAs to establish an English learner parent advisory
committee if the enrollment of the LEA includes at least 15%
ELs and the LEA enrolls at least 50 pupils who are ELs.
2.Establishes several oversight, review, and audit requirements
to ensure LEA compliance with statutory and regulatory LCAP
requirements and that LEA budgets provide sufficient resources
to achieve LCAP goals.
3.Requires, consistent with the English Learner and Immigrant
Pupil Federal Conformity Act and Title III of the federal No
Child Left Behind Act of 2001, an eligible local educational
agency desiring a subgrant under Title III to submit a plan
around ELs to the California Department of Education outlining
programs, activities, accountability measures, parental
engagement and participation, assurances of consultation with
specified entities, and a description of how language
instruction education programs ensure that ELs served by the
programs will develop English proficiency.
This bill:
1.Requires the annual external audit of LEAs to include a
determination of whether expenditures were in compliance with
regulations adopted by SBE governing the expenditure of funds
apportioned based on the number and concentration of ELs, low
income (LI) pupils, and pupils in foster care.
CONTINUED
SB 344
Page
3
2.Requires that, when county superintendents of school reviews
school district budgets and when the Superintendent of Public
Instruction reviews county of education budgets, they
determine whether the proposed expenditures comply with
regulations adopted by the SBE governing the expenditure of
funds apportioned based on the number and concentration of
EL/LI pupils and pupils in foster care; and requires them to
disapprove a budget if it is not in compliance with the
regulations.
3.Requires LEAs to spend unexpended funds received for the
Economic Aid Program only for purposes authorized by the
program as statutory and regulatory provisions read on June
30, 2013.
4.Adds reclassified ELs to the subgroups of pupils whose
academic achievement must be measured by the Academic
Performance Index (API) for accountability purposes and
provides that the inclusion of reclassified learners in the
API shall, at a minimum, be consistent with the manner in
which reclassified ELs are included in the determination of
adequate yearly progress, as required by federal law.
5.Adds the following elements to the LCAP that each LEA is
required to adopt by July 1, 2014:
A. A listing and description of the expenditures for the
initial fiscal year implementing the specific actions
included in the local control and accountability plan;
B. A listing and description of the expenditures for the
initial fiscal year that will serve EL/LI pupils, pupils in
foster care, and reclassified ELs.
1.Requires the LCAP to include a description of the extent to
which teachers, administrators, and staff receive professional
development or participate in induction programs.
2.Requires that any notifications provided to parents be in the
primary language of the parent, in accordance with existing
law.
3.Changes the conditions under which a district must establish
CONTINUED
SB 344
Page
4
an English learner parent advisory committee from enrolling at
least 15% EL pupils and enrolling at least 50 EL pupils to
enrolling at least 15% EL pupils or enrolling at least 50 EL
pupils.
4.Provides that the English learner parent advisory committee is
required as a condition of receiving supplemental grant funds
through the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF).
5. Requires school district parent advisory committees to
advise the district governing board on the following:
A. Establishing school district goals and objectives for
programs and services for EL pupils to ensure that the
academic and language proficiency needs of ELs, including
long-term ELs and ELs at risk of becoming long-term ELs
are being met;
B. Administering the home language survey; and
C. School district reclassification procedures.
1. Clarifies that LEAs are not required to establish a new
districtwide English learner district or schoolsite parent
advisory committee if one already exists.
2. Requires the LCAP template to be adopted by the SBE to meet
the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind Act
related to the Single Plan for Pupil Achievement and to
ensure that LEAs that receive supplemental and concentration
funds include in their LCAPs information on the instructional
programs and services provided to EL/LI pupils, pupils in
foster care, and reclassified ELs to increase their academic
achievement.
3. Contains double-jointing language to avoid chaptering out
issues with AB 103 (Budget Committee), AB 484 (Bonilla), and
SB 97 (Budget and Fiscal Review Committee) of the current
legislative session.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, "increased
CONTINUED
SB 344
Page
5
annual General Fund/Proposition 98 (GF/98) state reimbursable
mandated costs, likely in excess of $500,000, to LEAs to
implement the requirements of this measure, including providing
EL specific information in each LEA's LCAP - expenditure,
instructional, and achievement information. This cost may be
offset if the requirements of this measure are determined to be
consistent with federal law and therefore, are not eligible for
reimbursement. The costs associated with this measure are in
addition to the annual GF/98 state reimbursable mandated costs
LEAs will incur for the accountability requirements under LCFF -
developing plans, reporting data, convening committees for
comment and input, etc. In the initial years of LCFF
implementation, the GF/98 state reimbursable mandated costs will
likely be in millions to tens of millions; however, these costs
will likely be reduced in future years as LEAs will only likely
be revising plans."
SUPPORT : (Verified 9/12/13)
American Civil Liberties Union of California
California Association for Bilingual Education
Californians Together
EdVoice
Families in Schools
Public Advocates
OPPOSITION : (Verified 9/12/13)
Association of California School Administrators
California Association of School Business Officials
California Association of Suburban Schools
California Federation of Teachers
California School Boards Association
California School Employees Association
California Teachers Association
Central Valley Education Coalition
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : Supporters argue this bill, "which
clarifies key components of the newly enacted Local Control
Funding Formula (LCFF). As California's leading organization
working to close the opportunity and achievement gaps for
low-income students and students of color, we believe SB 344 is
essential to providing needed clarification on school district
spending, level of fiscal transparency, and accountability for
CONTINUED
SB 344
Page
6
English learners so that the resources the state sends to our
schools and districts truly serve the students LCFF intends to
benefit.
"The spending clarifications included in this bill are vital to
ensuring state resources are allocated according to stated LCFF
intent. We believe it is important that in the transition years
there is guidance on how past monies can and cannot be spent and
that any future expenditures be aligned with the spending
guidelines the State Board of Education develops. We are
pleased SB 344 calls for LEAs to include a review of whether its
expenditures were in compliance with regulations governing the
use of funds generated by unduplicated pupils. And, we agree
with SB 344's clarification that the LCAPs must include not only
annual goals and specific actions, but also program budgets and
expenditures necessary to implement those actions. These
changes are needed to ensure monies meant for our most
disadvantaged students reach them and that a district's budget
is responsive to its local student needs."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : Opponents argue, "One of our major
concerns is that the bill would pre-empt the LCFF regulatory
process that is currently being undertaken through the authority
of the State Board of Education (SBE). In effect, SB 344
presumes that many of these critical transparency and
accountability issues will not be addressed during the
regulatory process. We disagree and believe that the process
should be allowed to develop, after which time there will be
ample opportunity to determine what accountability components
may be lacking.
"Further, the bill would establish reclassified English learners
as a subgroup for which improvement in academic achievement must
be demonstrated. While we agree that reclassified EL students
demand the focus of LEAs, we would also note that Senator
Padilla's SB 1108 (Chapter 434, Statutes of 2012), requires the
California Department of Education to develop a list of best
practices of how districts handle the reclassification of EL
students, and that study is not yet completed. Additionally, it
is not at all clear what the fiscal and educational impacts
would be of having reclassified English learners as a subgroup
as is proposed in the bill. Such a determination should only be
made after significant review of the possible impacts on
students, district requirements and cost and the accountability
CONTINUED
SB 344
Page
7
for this additional subgroup. For these reasons, this provision
is premature."
GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE:
"I am returning Senate Bill 344 without my signature.
This bill interferes with the work of the State Board of
Education as it implements, through an open and transparent
process, the Local Control Funding Formula.
Moreover, it contains provisions contrary to the July budget
agreement.
For these reasons, I am unable to sign this bill."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 67-3, 9/12/13
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Bigelow, Bloom,
Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian
Calderon, Campos, Chau, Ch�vez, Conway, Cooley, Dahle, Daly,
Dickinson, Eggman, Fox, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Garcia, Gomez,
Gonzalez, Gordon, Gorell, Gray, Grove, Hagman, Hall, Harkey,
Roger Hern�ndez, Holden, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Linder,
Logue, Maienschein, Mansoor, Melendez, Mitchell, Morrell,
Mullin, Nazarian, Nestande, Olsen, Patterson, Perea, V. Manuel
P�rez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Salas, Skinner, Stone, Ting,
Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Yamada, John A. P�rez
NOES: Gatto, Muratsuchi, Williams
NO VOTE RECORDED: Chesbro, Donnelly, Fong, Lowenthal, Medina,
Pan, Rendon, Wieckowski, Vacancy, Vacancy
PQ:nk 1/6/14 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED